On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 10:32:30AM -0500, Madhavan T. Venkataraman wrote: > On 5/6/21 10:30 AM, Madhavan T. Venkataraman wrote: > > OK. I could make the section an argument to SYM_CODE*() so that a developer > > will never miss that. Some documentation may be in order so the guidelines > > are clear. I will do the doc patch separately, if that is alright with > > you all. > There is just one problem with this. Sometimes, there is some data in the > same text section. That data will not get included when we do the SYM_CODE(section) > change. Yes, data would need to be handled separately still. That doesn't seem insurmountable though?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
