[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/init: Annotate all command line parameter infrastructure as const



(CC the correct email for Stefano)

On 09/06/16 15:19, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi Andrew,

On 09/06/16 14:45, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 09/06/16 13:39, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 09.06.16 at 11:58, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
--- a/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
@@ -135,6 +135,12 @@ SECTIONS
         *(.init.rodata)
         *(.init.rodata.rel)
         *(.init.rodata.str*)
+
+       . = ALIGN(POINTER_ALIGN);
+       __setup_start = .;
+       *(.init.setup)
+       __setup_end = .;
+
         *(.init.data)
         *(.init.data.rel)
         *(.init.data.rel.*)
@@ -145,11 +151,6 @@ SECTIONS
         __ctors_end = .;
    } :text
    . = ALIGN(32);
-  .init.setup : {
-       __setup_start = .;
-       *(.init.setup)
-       __setup_end = .;
-  } :text
    .init.proc.info : {
Surely that ALIGN() then has no reason to retain the 32 (similar
for x86)?

I don't know where this ALIGN() came from, but I am hesitant to remove
it until I am sure it is safe to do so.

For both x86 and arm, .initcall will take a little more work to
disentangle, although I do intend to make it happen.

On arm, .init.proc.info is an array of 32byte elements.  Looking at its
contents, it should be constant, and probably wants 4 byte alignment as
opposed to 32.

proc_info_list contains some pointers, so we want 4-byte for ARM32 and
8-byte for ARM64. I would use POINTER_ALIGN here.

Regards,


--
Julien Grall

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.