Re: [PATCH] x86: fix build with older binutils and consolidate linker script

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

On 08/23/2009 11:55 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> 21.08.09 22:23 >>>
>> On 08/18/2009 08:51 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>  
>>>  #define VSYSCALL_ADDR (-10*1024*1024)
>>> -#define VSYSCALL_PHYS_ADDR ((LOADADDR(.data.read_mostly) + \
>>> -                            SIZEOF(.data.read_mostly) + 4095) & ~(4095))
>>> -#define VSYSCALL_VIRT_ADDR ((ADDR(.data.read_mostly) + \
>>> -                            SIZEOF(.data.read_mostly) + 4095) & ~(4095))
>>> +#define VSYSCALL_PHYS_ADDR ((LOADADDR(.data) + SIZEOF(.data) + \
>>> +                            PAGE_SIZE - 1) & ~(PAGE_SIZE - 1))
>>> +#define VSYSCALL_VIRT_ADDR ((ADDR(.data) + SIZEOF(.data) + \
>>> +                            PAGE_SIZE - 1) & ~(PAGE_SIZE - 1))
>>>  
>> I'm missing something with this chunk... could you please explain?
> 
> There are two changes here: One is the adjustment to properly use the
> new preceding section's name, and the other is to replace the hard coded
> 4095 by PAGE_SIZE-1.
> 

Hm.  I'm wondering if an actual (NOLOAD)/@nobits section wouldn't be
better...

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.