From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Woodhouse Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/23] make section names compatible with -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections: parisc Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 15:57:42 +0100 Message-ID: <1215010662.10393.459.camel@pmac.infradead.org> References: <200807020239.11410.vda.linux@googlemail.com> <1214955660.3316.31.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200807020200.49518.vda.linux@googlemail.com> <1214988107.10393.444.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <20080702145514.GC4196@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20080702145514.GC4196@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> Sender: linux-embedded-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Adrian Bunk Cc: Denys Vlasenko , James Bottomley , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Russell King , David Howells , Ralf Baechle , Lennert Buytenhek , Josh Boyer , Paul Mackerras , Andi Kleen , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, Paul Gortmaker , linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tim Bird , Martin Schwidefsky , Dave Miller On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 17:55 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 09:41:47AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 02:00 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > > > On Wednesday 02 July 2008 01:41, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 02:39 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > > > > > The purpose of this patch is to make kernel buildable > > > > > with "gcc -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections". > > > > > This patch fixes parisc architecture. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Denys Vlasenko > > > > > > > > Um ... if you look at the Makefile you'll see we already build parisc > > > > with -ffunction-sections; we have to: our relative jumps are too small > > > > to guarantee finding the stubs in large files. > > > > > > > > Since our text is -ffunction-sections compatible already, I question the > > > > need for transformations like this: > > > > We've been building FR-V kernels with --gc-sections for a long time, > > too. > >... > > Is there any specific reason why it's not done in the upstream kernel? Isn't it? I thought it was. Or maybe we were only doing that before we added MMU support. I remember the exception tables complicate matters a little. -- dwmw2