Has this fix been merged yet? It seems to me that the patch Michael sent
is a totally reasonable solution to this problem, and I had assumed that
it was going to get picked up in the m68k tree when I saw this patch 2
months ago...
-Tim Abbott
On Mon, 11 Jan 2010, Michael Schmitz wrote:
Followup on this: You are absolutely right - the problem appears to be related
to the the .init_end section _only_ having the ALIGN, and nothing else (i.e.
no actual section content).
Placing the align in the .m68k_fixup section like such:
--- arch/m68k/kernel/vmlinux-std.lds.org 2010-01-09 11:01:05.000000000
+1300
+++ arch/m68k/kernel/vmlinux-std.lds 2010-01-12 08:43:07.000000000 +1300
@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@
__start_fixup = .;
*(.m68k_fixup)
__stop_fixup = .;
+ . = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);
}
NOTES
.init_end : {
still puts .init_end, __init_end and _end on a page boundary, but also extends
the load section up to that page boundary. (Unfortunately, it also extends the
kernel file size by a bit).
Can the same be achieved in a more elegant way? The reason why the old script
worked with my binutils appears to be the placement of the initramfs data right
at the end - the start of initramfs is page aligned, and the size of the
initramfs is an integer number of pages, so the end of initramfs data,
__init_end and _end all are on a page boundary. With the fixup section now
placed after the initramfs explicitly, this no longer happens by accident...
Cheers,
Michael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
