From: Sam Edwards <cfsworks@gmail.com>
To: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>,
u-boot@lists.denx.de, trini@konsulko.com
Cc: caleb.connolly@linaro.org, sumit.garg@linaro.org,
Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>,
Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu>,
Kever Yang <kever.yang@rock-chips.com>,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>,
Yegor Yefremov <yegorslists@googlemail.com>,
Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk@gmx.de>,
Shiji Yang <yangshiji66@outlook.com>,
Bin Meng <bmeng@tinylab.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] arm: fix __efi_runtime_start/end definitions
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2024 01:14:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ccfe2f01-765b-4953-b0b5-9122b861d89b@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240304090113.1410575-6-ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
On 3/4/24 02:01, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
> __efi_runtime_start/end are defined as c variables for arm7 only in
> order to force the compiler emit relative references. However, defining
> those within a section definition will do the same thing. On top of that
> the v8 linker scripts define it as a symbol.
>
> So let's remove the special sections from the linker scripts, the
> variable definitions from sections.c and define them as a symbols within
> the correct section.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
Tested-by: Sam Edwards <CFSworks@gmail.com> # Binary output identical
Thanks for the cleanup,
Sam
> ---
> arch/arm/cpu/u-boot.lds | 12 +++---------
> arch/arm/lib/sections.c | 2 --
> arch/arm/mach-zynq/u-boot.lds | 12 +++---------
> include/asm-generic/sections.h | 1 +
> 4 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/u-boot.lds b/arch/arm/cpu/u-boot.lds
> index 7c6e7891d360..df55bb716e35 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/u-boot.lds
> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/u-boot.lds
> @@ -43,18 +43,12 @@ SECTIONS
> }
>
> /* This needs to come before *(.text*) */
> - .__efi_runtime_start : {
> - *(.__efi_runtime_start)
> - }
> -
> - .efi_runtime : {
> + .efi_runtime ALIGN(4) : {
Do we truly require the ALIGN(4)? If I understand correctly, by default,
the linker calculates the alignment of an output section as the least
common multiple of the input sections' alignment requirements -- meaning
most (perhaps all) of our ALIGN()s today are redundant. For the time
being, I'm in favor of merging existing `. = ALIGN(x)` into each
following section for clarity and to avoid the testing overhead of
removing them in the same patch as other changes. However, in the near
future (perhaps even as "near" as v2 of this series?), I'd also like to
see a patch that eliminates unnecessary ALIGN()s altogether. Introducing
additional ALIGN()s where we already know they aren't needed may be a
step away from that goal.
> + __efi_runtime_start = .;
> *(.text.efi_runtime*)
> *(.rodata.efi_runtime*)
> *(.data.efi_runtime*)
> - }
> -
> - .__efi_runtime_stop : {
> - *(.__efi_runtime_stop)
> + __efi_runtime_stop = .;
> }
>
> .text_rest :
> diff --git a/arch/arm/lib/sections.c b/arch/arm/lib/sections.c
> index 1ee3dd3667ba..a4d4202e99f5 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/lib/sections.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/lib/sections.c
> @@ -25,6 +25,4 @@ char __secure_start[0] __section(".__secure_start");
> char __secure_end[0] __section(".__secure_end");
> char __secure_stack_start[0] __section(".__secure_stack_start");
> char __secure_stack_end[0] __section(".__secure_stack_end");
> -char __efi_runtime_start[0] __section(".__efi_runtime_start");
> -char __efi_runtime_stop[0] __section(".__efi_runtime_stop");
> char _end[0] __section(".__end");
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-zynq/u-boot.lds b/arch/arm/mach-zynq/u-boot.lds
> index 71dea4a1f60a..fcd0f42a7106 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-zynq/u-boot.lds
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-zynq/u-boot.lds
> @@ -22,18 +22,12 @@ SECTIONS
> }
>
> /* This needs to come before *(.text*) */
> - .__efi_runtime_start : {
> - *(.__efi_runtime_start)
> - }
> -
> - .efi_runtime : {
> + .efi_runtime ALIGN(4) : {
Ditto above
> + __efi_runtime_start = .;
> *(.text.efi_runtime*)
> *(.rodata.efi_runtime*)
> *(.data.efi_runtime*)
> - }
> -
> - .__efi_runtime_stop : {
> - *(.__efi_runtime_stop)
> + __efi_runtime_stop = .;
> }
>
> .text_rest :
> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/sections.h b/include/asm-generic/sections.h
> index 60949200dd93..b6bca53db10d 100644
> --- a/include/asm-generic/sections.h
> +++ b/include/asm-generic/sections.h
> @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ extern char __priv_data_start[], __priv_data_end[];
> extern char __ctors_start[], __ctors_end[];
>
> extern char __efi_runtime_rel_start[], __efi_runtime_rel_stop[];
> +extern char __efi_runtime_start[], __efi_runtime_stop[];
>
> /* function descriptor handling (if any). Override
> * in asm/sections.h */
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-06 8:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-04 9:01 [PATCH 0/6] Clean up arm linker scripts Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-04 9:01 ` [PATCH 1/6] arm: baltos: remove custom linker script Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-04 9:01 ` [PATCH 2/6] arm: clean up v7 and v8 linker scripts for bss_start/end Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-06 7:32 ` Sam Edwards
2024-03-06 9:08 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-06 10:11 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-04 9:01 ` [PATCH 3/6] arm: fix __efi_runtime_rel_start/end definitions Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-06 7:35 ` Sam Edwards
2024-03-04 9:01 ` [PATCH 4/6] arm: clean up v7 and v8 linker scripts for __rel_dyn_start/end Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-06 7:35 ` Sam Edwards
2024-03-04 9:01 ` [PATCH 5/6] arm: fix __efi_runtime_start/end definitions Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-06 8:14 ` Sam Edwards [this message]
2024-03-06 9:13 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-06 22:19 ` Sam Edwards
2024-03-07 6:50 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-08 13:22 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-08 14:14 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-08 15:10 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-04 9:01 ` [PATCH 6/6] arm: move image_copy_start/end to linker symbols Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-06 8:22 ` Sam Edwards
2024-03-06 9:35 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-06 10:37 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-06 13:23 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-06 23:08 ` Sam Edwards
2024-03-07 6:55 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2024-03-07 16:45 ` Ilias Apalodimas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ccfe2f01-765b-4953-b0b5-9122b861d89b@gmail.com \
--to=cfsworks@gmail.com \
--cc=bmeng@tinylab.org \
--cc=caleb.connolly@linaro.org \
--cc=ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org \
--cc=kever.yang@rock-chips.com \
--cc=michal.simek@amd.com \
--cc=philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu \
--cc=sjg@chromium.org \
--cc=sumit.garg@linaro.org \
--cc=trini@konsulko.com \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
--cc=xypron.glpk@gmx.de \
--cc=yangshiji66@outlook.com \
--cc=yegorslists@googlemail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox