From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: [patch 16/21] Xen-paravirt: Add code into head.S to handle being booted by Xen Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 18:23:40 -0800 Message-ID: <45D3C42C.1020005@goop.org> References: <20070213221729.772002682@goop.org> <20070213221830.707197267@goop.org> <20070213235424.GA1908@muc.de> <45D35ABE.1050504@goop.org> <45D3740A.4080600@goop.org> <45D3A5A4.7080804@goop.org> <45D3BCC6.9020807@goop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: Andrew Morton , Zachary Amsden , xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, virtualization@lists.osdl.org, Ian Campbell , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Chris Wright , Andi Kleen List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org Eric W. Biederman wrote: > I'm pretty certain we explicitly drop the weird GNU note that > is automatically generated by gcc and specifies something informational. > But that's something else again, since it appears as a PT_GNU_STACK phdr. > I don't think anything we are doing is wrong but ld gets confused easily > in the corner cases. I'm modestly surprised we didn't have to mark our > .note.xxx scions as ".section .note.xxx @note" or whatever the proper > gas syntax is. I did try that, and it didn't make a difference. The manual says that the output section type follows the input section type, so I agree its a bit surprising we ever get a SHT_NOTE out of it without the @note stuff. J