[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFC] Add __initbss section

To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Add __initbss section
From: Franck Bui-Huu <>
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 21:52:42 +0200
Cc: Ralf Baechle <>, Geert Uytterhoeven <>, linux-mips <>
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; 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; bh=kXxUrVFf+PxHhylMiAkNrrvEGS60cN5ONfDZEiPRE7M=; b=kBkRXRAHOn9YMyjLL8CnHUEK5z192FYDP5+Ey4MtpCo/51qnRV9FMvgIEuulpjc3ADq7oZlDg3bFlnchqEfX22L13W9i4mKHcuEqpDb1h6A6MEHwQjGLHmOHeqqNTavhZG3W+CRPrVt0LjUyx1U/Ma6EY5P8fHK9NVe0jWcGpdQ=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;; 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=o7TxH4eeOse3tgH7jrpW8bvs2dFsMfE2xkovzvWLLDmGmUfGqKvSwIYMifg+lLaEYPImYAI6TD9G7aLvv6SA1oZaBsI3jVeBNqEPVvBlTyeCkF4OisBoUtYcwcGLzZnBiAWXgHYFYhevNB5xJPZLOIatUftP7EwLwc8/eMd01OU=
In-reply-to: <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <> <>
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20070719)
Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2007, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
>> and the kernel image is bigger after the patch is applied !
>> $ ls -l vmlinux*
>> -rwxrwxr-x 1 fbuihuu fbuihuu 2503324 2007-10-11 11:41 vmlinux*
>> -rwxrwxr-x 1 fbuihuu fbuihuu 2503264 2007-10-11 11:41 vmlinux~old*
>> Could anybody explain me why ? The time is missing and I probably
>> couldn't investigate into this until this weekend. 
>  I guess for a bss-type section you want to use something like:
>       .section .init.bss,"aw",@nobits

Sorry but I'm missing your point here. This indeed should be added
for assembler code but I don't see how it's related with the kernel
image size difference I was seeing.

>  Well, there should be no need for an extra segment -- just rearrange the 
> order of the sections in the linker script appropriately.  You should 
> probably add __exitbss for consistency too.  You can make all the three 
> sections adjacent so that no separate initialisation is required.

I'll do that.


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