On 23/09/2024 12:48 pm, [email protected] wrote: > On Mon, 2024-09-23 at 12:56 +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 19.09.2024 17:59, Oleksii Kurochko wrote: >>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S >>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S >>> @@ -321,14 +321,7 @@ SECTIONS >>> DECL_SECTION(.bss) { >>> __bss_start = .; >>> *(.bss.page_aligned*) >>> - . = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE); >>> - __per_cpu_start = .; >>> - *(.bss.percpu.page_aligned) >>> - *(.bss.percpu) >>> - . = ALIGN(SMP_CACHE_BYTES); >>> - *(.bss.percpu.read_mostly) >>> - . = ALIGN(SMP_CACHE_BYTES); >>> - __per_cpu_data_end = .; >>> + PERCPU_SECTION >>> *(.bss .bss.*) >>> . = ALIGN(POINTER_ALIGN); >>> __bss_end = .; >> Like the _SEC in the other patch I question _SECTION here, albeit for >> a different >> reason: This is no separate output section, and it's more than one >> kind of input >> ones. Perhaps PERCPU_DATA? With that >> Acked-by: Jan Beulich <[email protected]> > Sure, I will drop _SECTION here too. Thanks.
Can we call it PERCPU_BSS? Just to highlight the fact that it really is BSS, and not initialised DATA. ~Andrew
