From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cooper Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/boot: Move some __high_start code and data into init sections Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 15:09:49 +0100 Message-ID: <535E612D.2080705@citrix.com> References: <1398690404-9559-1-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> <1398690404-9559-3-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> <535E7C27020000780000D04E@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <535E7C27020000780000D04E@nat28.tlf.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: Keir Fraser , Xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 28/04/14 15:04, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 28.04.14 at 15:06, wrote: >> --- a/xen/arch/x86/boot/x86_64.S >> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/boot/x86_64.S >> @@ -29,7 +29,11 @@ >> >> test %ebx,%ebx >> jnz start_secondary >> + jmp start_bsp >> >> + .section .init.text, "ax", @progbits >> + >> +GLOBAL(start_bsp) > I'm sorry, I'm afraid I overlooked this in v1 - why GLOBAL()? (The other > two patches look fine to me now, so no need to re-send those in case > this one needs changing.) > > Jan There is an explanation below the --- in the patch. The issues is that start_bsp and trampoline_end have the same address, leading to a confusing disassembly. ~Andrew