From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: davidb@codeaurora.org (David Brown)
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 09:02:29 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: two possible fixes for the KALLSYMS build problem
In-Reply-To: <20120612143249.GB7918@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
References: <1338567721-19514-1-git-send-email-davidb@codeaurora.org>
 <20120611203748.GA16967@codeaurora.org>
 <20120612143249.GB7918@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Message-ID: <20120612160229.GA21389@codeaurora.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 03:32:49PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 01:37:48PM -0700, David Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 09:21:59AM -0700, David Brown wrote:
> > 
> > > David Brown (1):
> > >   ARM: Prevent KALLSYM size mismatch on ARM.
> > > 
> > >  arch/arm/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S |    3 +++
> > >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > 
> > Just wondering if anyone has had a chance to look at either of these,
> > or try them.  I haven't seen any KALLSYMS mismatch build errors with
> > either of these patches applied.
> 
> I think variant 2 is the better approach out of either as it doesn't add
> to the size of the resulting kernel image.

The first variant doesn't ever increase the size of the kernel,
either.  Variant two actually makes it a little smaller, since a few
symbols are eliminated.

The second variant is cleaner, though as long as it is safe in every
configuration.

David

-- 
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.