[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] Clang/LLVM version requirements
Il 13/09/2012 13:52, Jan Beulich ha scritto: > > So the patch is fine by me if it covers that misalignment case. > But it seems a little heavy handed - I'd think that instead of the > sub-section, we could just create an arbitrary other section, or > even allow uninitialized variable (it's unclear to me why Paolo > wrote the comment - in c/s 25479:61dfb3da56b - regarding BSS > the way it is now) - after all we only need to make sure that > - the space gets properly allocated in trampoline.S, i.e. also in > reloc.bin > - all accesses are PC-relative > Neither has anything to do with use of uninitialized variables. We cannot use BSS because it doesn't appear in reloc.S. Apart from BSS, there would be no benefit for reloc to move itself to BOOT_TRAMPOLINE, because BOOT_TRAMPOLINE is not a known location anymore. So it was easier to just run it in place from where we put it, in the middle of head.S, but this means BSS disappears after extracting reloc.bin. So it's not really because the code must be relocatable, but more because of the way we extract the binary data and put it in the middle of head.S. Initialized data works as long as you pass -fno-zero-initialized-in-bss to the compiler or it is eaten. I used assembly to declare the alloc variable, because I wasn't sure of which GCC versions need the option, and whether older versions are supported for compiling Xen. Paolo _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |