linux-mips-fnet
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Location of init_task_union

To: "Ralf Baechle" <ralf@uni-koblenz.de>
Subject: Re: Location of init_task_union
From: "Bradley D. LaRonde" <brad@ltc.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 17:32:15 -0500
Cc: <linux@engr.sgi.com>, <linux-mips@fnet.fr>, <linux-mips@vger.rutgers.edu>
References: <007801bf3500$90edf810$b8119526@ltc.com> <19991123230824.E16508@uni-koblenz.de> <01f101bf3601$0cf42fa0$b8119526@ltc.com> <19991123232110.H16508@uni-koblenz.de>
----- Original Message -----
From: Ralf Baechle <ralf@uni-koblenz.de>
To: Bradley D. LaRonde <brad@ltc.com>
Cc: <linux@engr.sgi.com>; <linux-mips@fnet.fr>;
<linux-mips@vger.rutgers.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 1999 5:21 PM
Subject: Re: Location of init_task_union


> On Tue, Nov 23, 1999 at 05:21:12PM -0500, Bradley D. LaRonde wrote:
>
> > > > I can easily move it to .data or .data.init_task like i386, but I'm
> > > > wondering if there is some special reason why it is in .text on mips
and
> > > > .data on i386.
> > >
> > > Doesn't matter when it ends up, it only needs to be 8kb aligned which
is
> > > why we have to do such silly things.
> >
> > i386 does it by putting it in it's own segment, then aligning that
segment
> > in the linker script.  Can we switch to that way?
>
> Yes.  I already did this in my private source for another, MIPS64 related
> reason.

OK, thanks.  I think that also alleviates the need for that ALIGN at the end
of head.S, plus we can get rid of the .text just above there in head.S,
right?  BTW, is there some historical reason for that .text?

Regards,
Brad

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>