From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:01:14 +0100 (BST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]:65474 "EHLO dl5rb.ham-radio-op.net") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S20036890AbXJOQBL (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:01:11 +0100 Received: from denk.linux-mips.net (denk.linux-mips.net [127.0.0.1]) by dl5rb.ham-radio-op.net (8.14.1/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l9FG19Df018028; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:01:09 +0100 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by denk.linux-mips.net (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id l9FG19r5018027; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:01:09 +0100 Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:01:09 +0100 From: Ralf Baechle To: Franck Bui-Huu Cc: "Maciej W. Rozycki" , Geert Uytterhoeven , linux-mips Subject: Re: [RFC] Add __initbss section Message-ID: <20071015160109.GA11048@linux-mips.org> References: <470DF25E.60009@gmail.com> <20071011124410.GA17202@linux-mips.org> <47127110.4060206@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47127110.4060206@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.14 (2007-02-12) Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 17042 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 09:42:08PM +0200, Franck Bui-Huu wrote: > > .exit.data and .exit.text may reference each other. __exit functions > > generally get compiled into .exit.text but some constructs such as jump > > tables for switch() constructs may be compiled into address tables which > > gcc unfortunately will put into .rodata, so .rodata will end up > > referencing function addresses in .exit.text which makes ld unhappy if > > .exit.text was discarded. So until this is fixed in gcc we can't > > discard exit code, unfortunately. > > > > Thanks for the details. > > I actually don't see any point to move these tables in .rodata since > they're part of the code... As I recall the argumentation was they should go there because that section can be marked no-exec. Which isn't terribly useful on MIPS where only very few processors have the no-exec capability. Anyway, I guess it takes somebody to cook a patch :-) Ralf