* warning: allocated section `.data_nosave' not in segment
@ 2009-09-25 20:54 Sean MacLennan
2009-09-28 5:36 ` Sean MacLennan
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sean MacLennan @ 2009-09-25 20:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-dev
Anybody else getting these? They just started popping up with the
recent changes for 2.6.32.
ppc_4xxFP-ld: .tmp_vmlinux1: warning: allocated section `.data_nosave'
not in segment KSYM .tmp_kallsyms1.S
AS .tmp_kallsyms1.o
LD .tmp_vmlinux2
ppc_4xxFP-ld: .tmp_vmlinux2: warning: allocated section `.data_nosave' not in segment
KSYM .tmp_kallsyms2.S
AS .tmp_kallsyms2.o
LD vmlinux
ppc_4xxFP-ld: vmlinux: warning: allocated section `.data_nosave' not in segment
Cheers,
Sean
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: warning: allocated section `.data_nosave' not in segment
2009-09-25 20:54 warning: allocated section `.data_nosave' not in segment Sean MacLennan
@ 2009-09-28 5:36 ` Sean MacLennan
2009-09-28 15:53 ` Sean MacLennan
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sean MacLennan @ 2009-09-28 5:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-dev
If I revert the commit show at the bottom of this email, the warnings
go away.
It took a while to find this, git bisect kept pointing me to a file
from arch/alpha :(
Cheers,
Sean
powerpc: Cleanup linker script using new linker script macros.
author Tim Abbott <tabbott@ksplice.com>
Thu, 24 Sep 2009 14:36:24 +0000 (10:36 -0400)
committer Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Fri, 25 Sep 2009 00:16:22 +0000 (17:16 -0700)
commit 62bef288588bee976b753f7168716621d7a984e2
tree 8f55ea7fc2c5d651b72d1addad5687d61b857910 tree |
snapshot
parent 4a5e35135d1ffcf14ebb2bb3c730b92c18ae9657 commit |
diff
powerpc: Cleanup linker script using new linker script macros.
Signed-off-by: Tim Abbott <tabbott@ksplice.com>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Acked-by: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: warning: allocated section `.data_nosave' not in segment
2009-09-28 5:36 ` Sean MacLennan
@ 2009-09-28 15:53 ` Sean MacLennan
2009-09-28 20:56 ` Segher Boessenkool
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sean MacLennan @ 2009-09-28 15:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-dev
I looked into it some more.... the patch converts this section:
. = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);
.data_nosave : AT(ADDR(.data_nosave) - LOAD_OFFSET) {
__nosave_begin = .;
*(.data.nosave)
. = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);
__nosave_end = .;
}
to:
.data_nosave : AT(ADDR(.data_nosave) - LOAD_OFFSET) {
NOSAVE_DATA
}
If you expand the NOSAVE_DATA macro, you get:
.data_nosave : AT(ADDR(.data_nosave) - LOAD_OFFSET) {
. = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);
VMLINUX_SYMBOL(__nosave_begin) = .;
*(.data.nosave)
. = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);
VMLINUX_SYMBOL(__nosave_end) = .;
}
If you ignore the VMLINUX_SYMBOL, the only difference is moving the
ALIGN inside the brackets. If I move the ALIGN back where it was, then
the warning goes away.
But other sections moved the ALIGN without an issue. Could it be a
compiler problem? We are using version 4.0.0 (DENX ELDK 4.1 4.0.0).
Cheers,
Sean
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: warning: allocated section `.data_nosave' not in segment
2009-09-28 15:53 ` Sean MacLennan
@ 2009-09-28 20:56 ` Segher Boessenkool
2009-09-28 23:24 ` Sean MacLennan
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Segher Boessenkool @ 2009-09-28 20:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sean MacLennan; +Cc: linuxppc-dev
> If you ignore the VMLINUX_SYMBOL, the only difference is moving the
> ALIGN inside the brackets. If I move the ALIGN back where it was, then
> the warning goes away.
>
> But other sections moved the ALIGN without an issue. Could it be a
> compiler problem? We are using version 4.0.0 (DENX ELDK 4.1 4.0.0).
The compiler version is probably not relevant; the binutils versions
might be though. But, it seems to me the patch was simply botched,
the ALIGN() should not have moved.
Look at the output of "ld -M" (the ld command with all the args that
are used during the compile, with -M added) to see what's up; or maybe
readelf can tell you already.
Segher
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: warning: allocated section `.data_nosave' not in segment
2009-09-28 20:56 ` Segher Boessenkool
@ 2009-09-28 23:24 ` Sean MacLennan
2009-09-29 0:29 ` Segher Boessenkool
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sean MacLennan @ 2009-09-28 23:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Segher Boessenkool; +Cc: linuxppc-dev
Here is the ld -M output for the "bad" compile:
.data_nosave 0xc0376790 0x870 load address 0x00376790
0xc0377000 . = ALIGN (0x1000)
*fill* 0xc0376790 0x870 00
0xc0377000 __nosave_begin = .
*(.data.nosave)
0xc0377000 . = ALIGN (0x1000)
0xc0377000 __nosave_end = .
0xc0377000 . = ALIGN (0x1000)
0xc0377000 _edata = .
0xc0377000 PROVIDE (edata, .)
0xc0377000 . = ALIGN (0x0)
0xc0377000 __bss_start = .
0xc0377000 . = ALIGN (0x0)
.sbss 0xc0377000 0xad0 load address 0x00377000
Here is the ld -M output for a "good" compile (i.e. align before
the .data_nosave:
0xc0377000 . = ALIGN (0x1000)
.data_nosave 0xc0377000 0x0 load address 0x00377000
0xc0377000 __nosave_begin = .
*(.data.nosave)
0xc0377000 . = ALIGN (0x1000)
0xc0377000 __nosave_end = .
0xc0377000 . = ALIGN (0x1000)
0xc0377000 _edata = .
0xc0377000 PROVIDE (edata, .)
0xc0377000 . = ALIGN (0x0)
0xc0377000 __bss_start = .
0xc0377000 . = ALIGN (0x0)
.sbss 0xc0377000 0xad0 load address 0x00377000
It looks like putting the align before the .data.nosave puts all the
labels at the same address. Putting it *after* allows the .data_nosave
to be in a different page than the labels.
I can provide more info if needed. But it looks like everything is
nicely aligned, until the data_nosave, which needs the alignment. The
section before it is one of the few with stuff in it.
Cheers,
Sean
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: warning: allocated section `.data_nosave' not in segment
2009-09-28 23:24 ` Sean MacLennan
@ 2009-09-29 0:29 ` Segher Boessenkool
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Segher Boessenkool @ 2009-09-29 0:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sean MacLennan; +Cc: linuxppc-dev
> Here is the ld -M output for the "bad" compile:
>
> .data_nosave 0xc0376790 0x870 load address 0x00376790
> 0xc0377000 . = ALIGN (0x1000)
> *fill* 0xc0376790 0x870 00
Ah right. Having the ALIGN() inside the output section causes the linker
to put some filler in there, which makes it a non-empty section, but this
section isn't assigned to a segment so you get a warning from the linker.
I think the proper way to do this is to not put the ALIGN() before the
output section, nor inside it, but _on_ it, like
.data_nosave : ALIGN(0x1000) { .... }
Segher
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-09-29 0:29 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-09-25 20:54 warning: allocated section `.data_nosave' not in segment Sean MacLennan
2009-09-28 5:36 ` Sean MacLennan
2009-09-28 15:53 ` Sean MacLennan
2009-09-28 20:56 ` Segher Boessenkool
2009-09-28 23:24 ` Sean MacLennan
2009-09-29 0:29 ` Segher Boessenkool
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).