linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Remove '-mno-explicit-relocs' option when CONFIG_BUILD_E

To: Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Remove '-mno-explicit-relocs' option when CONFIG_BUILD_ELF64
From: Franck Bui-Huu <vagabon.xyz@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 21:39:24 +0200
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=kz6OH/cHWckmITOBs4jrRWq6qOLcLFomk/wvLuVqxBQ6kQsl8X0qHroposgNew/YvZAPKzt9BeckF1DKwOxvzCyTf+BjfXtk3JbKUzjIMrZgi5Yd6Kl1loN24Of7VIASiKD3mj3AyDdL1+iTdB0I6Ugg0LkQUh4pxnkvkgzcb3Q=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Awpp27wKMr6XMjYQxYIh4LpsETx70VA9VeuGOW7XuOyteT0N0A40w+XRbvJEKr6knxVKl/H0SUTCSU/BDqFjESRbTvEmB00Msw8JSuGAjwA4NEh48tmyev9risZmLtWFpVKCMZpJnd/0asLOBhrFD4/ikewkdIHEvNMO/qnlmDg=
In-reply-to: <20070809151812.GA28142@caradoc.them.org>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <11715446603241-git-send-email-fbuihuu@gmail.com> <20070809151812.GA28142@caradoc.them.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.5 (X11/20070719)
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 02:04:18PM +0100, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
>> From: Franck Bui-Huu <fbuihuu@gmail.com>
>>
>> This patch removes '-mno-explicit-relocs' usage when
>> CONFIG_BUILD_ELF64 is set since this option was only required
>> with the old hack to truncate addresses at the assembly level
>> where "-mabi=64 -Wa,-mabi=32" was used.
>>
>> This should yield a small code size improvement for inline
>> assembly, where the R constraint is used.
>>
>> The idea is coming from Maciej <macro@linux-mips.org>.
> 
> It looks like nothing ever came of these patches?  

yes it seems a common rule which is applied to the patches I send to
this mailing list ;)

> I tried to boot my
> Sentosa again today, and needed a slightly updated version of them.
> 

What do you mean by "slightly updated version" ? Did you rebase them
on top the current linux-mips tree, or something ? If not, what's your
kernel version ?

> I'm not positive I did the update correctly, though, since the board
> panics in swapper after jumping to a bogus pointer.
> 

Sorry I don't understand this. Do you mean:

  a) My kernel crashed, so I gave your patchset a try but it's still
     crahshing

  b) My kernel crashed, so I gave your patchset a try and it makes my
     kernel running fine.

I assume you're saying a).

Can you give a try to 2.6.23-rc2 because it includes commit
b1c65b3988c6e29ac371ab1cbbf6c4f8fb7092f8 which might fix your
issue. That would be a side effect but it gives us a hint on your
problem.

Also your .config, dmesg files are welcome.

                Franck

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