On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 04:08:53PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 08.03.2022 15:18, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 02:57:23PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> On 08.03.2022 14:49, Roger Pau Monne wrote: > >>> So it can be explicitly placed ahead of the rest of the .text content > >>> in the linker script (and thus the resulting image). This is a > >>> prerequisite for further work that will add a catch-all to the text > >>> section (.text.*). > >>> > >>> Note that placement of the sections inside of .text is also slightly > >>> adjusted to be more similar to the position found in the default GNU > >>> ld linker script. > >>> > >>> The special handling of the object file containing the header data as > >>> the first object file passed to the linker command line can also be > >>> removed. > >>> > >>> While there also remove the special handling of efi/ on x86. There's > >>> no need for the resulting object file to be passed in any special > >>> order to the linker. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger....@citrix.com> > >> > >> Looks good to me, but I have one question before feeling ready to > >> offer R-b: > >> > >>> @@ -86,8 +84,13 @@ SECTIONS > >>> *(.text.kexec) /* Page aligned in the object file. */ > >>> kexec_reloc_end = .; > >>> > >>> - *(.text.cold) > >>> - *(.text.unlikely) > >>> + *(.text.cold .text.cold.*) > >>> + *(.text.unlikely .text.*_unlikely .text.unlikely.*) > >> > >> What generates .text.*_unlikely? And if anything really does, why > >> would .text.cold not have a similar equivalent? > > > > That matches what I saw in the default linker script from my version > > of GNU ld: > > > > *(.text.unlikely .text.*_unlikely .text.unlikely.*) > > > > I really don't know what could generate .text.*_unlikely, but since > > it's part of the default linker script I assumed it was better to just > > add it. > > I've checked - gcc up to 4.5.x would generate .text.*_unlikely; from > 4.6.x. onwards it would be .text.unlikely.*. > > As to the dissimilarity with .text.cold: I wonder why we have that in > the first place. It matches our __cold attribute, just that we don't > use that anywhere afaics. > > In any event: > Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> > albeit preferably with .text.cold.* dropped again.
Would you mind dropping the .text.cold.* at commit? Otherwise I can resend. Thanks, Roger.
