From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tim Abbott Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] vmlinux.lds.h: Include *(.text.*) in TEXT_TEXT Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 18:21:07 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: References: <1276519112-11649-1-git-send-email-matt@console-pimps.org> <87y6ehxvby.fsf@linux-g6p1.site> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from mail-gw0-f46.google.com ([74.125.83.46]:60740 "EHLO mail-gw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755266Ab0FNWVL (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jun 2010 18:21:11 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87y6ehxvby.fsf@linux-g6p1.site> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Matt Fleming Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sam Ravnborg , Michal Marek , Denys Vlasenko , James Bottomley On Mon, 14 Jun 2010, Matt Fleming wrote: > Do these special kernel sections include things like the parisc > .text.do_softirq, .text.sys_exit, etc? James raised a good objection to > the parisc patch of this series. I'm guessing most people saw it already > but I'll paste it here for reference, > > This would destroy all of the named parisc text ordering we do above the > removed line because now you'd have swept up all the function sections > before we get to them, won't it? > > The ordering is an execution speed up on 32 bit systems because our > relative jump is so short. > > Will you changes handle this OK? I think I addressed this in my reply to James just now, but to be super clear, this -ffunction-sections plan involves renaming .text.do_softirq to .text..do_softirq (etc.) first. -Tim Abbott