Re: [PATCH] setup.c: introduce __pa_symbol() and get ride of CPHYSADDR()

[Franck Bui-Huu <vagabon.xyz@gmail.com>]

Atsushi Nemoto wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 17:59:20 +0100, Thiemo Seufer <ths@networkno.de> wrote:
>>> Just for clarification: IIRC this optimization needs somewhat
>>> up-to-date binutils/gcc and is not enabled on current lmo kernel,
>>> right?
>> For old toolchains there used to be a gruesome hack (which AFAIR broke
>> at some point), for modern toolchains there's -msym32.
> 
> Hmm, I found that the -msym32 is enabled if BUILD_ELF64 was not
> selected, since 2.6.17.  But does CONFIG_BUILD_ELF64=n really work for
> modules?  While MAP_BASE is 0xc000000000000000 for most 64-bit
> platforms, I suppose modules should not be compiled with -msym32.
> 

heh ? I'm wondering if anybody is using 'CONFIG_BUILD_ELF64=n' config at
all...

Atsushi, do you have any idea on how address are translated with
'CONFIG_BUILD_ELF64=n' config ? How such code is supposed to work ?

	code_resource.start = virt_to_phys(&_text);
 	code_resource.end = virt_to_phys(&_etext) - 1;
	data_resource.start = virt_to_phys(&_etext);
 	data_resource.end = virt_to_phys(&_edata) - 1;

Let's say that '&_text' is in KSEG0 and is equal to 0xffffffff80000000.
In this case virt_to_phys() returns 0x57ffffff80000000
(with PAGE_OFFSET = 0xa800000000000000). Is this physical address
correct ?

Thanks
		Franck