From: Rob Gardner <rob.gardner@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 13:46:46 -0600 > On 04/27/2016 01:36 PM, David Miller wrote: >> From: David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 15:33:55 -0400 (EDT) >> >>> Therefore some other aspect of the change is causing problems and I >>> think that aspect is the size of the new code. >> Actually, there is a way to prove that this is indeed the bug, Meelis >> what does the entry for "swapper_tsb" say in your System.map file for >> a failing kernel? >> >> If it is not "0000000000408000", then that shows the bug. >> > > > I've run into this situation, and the assembler emits a warning that > looks like this: > > arch/sparc/kernel/head_64.S:869: Warning: .space or .fill with > negative value, ignored > > I've worked around it by moving some of the includes to after the > ttable include. I think this is ok as long as code doesn't get > situated too far away for the branch displacement to handle. Maybe older binutils don't catch this properly. On my config here I definitely can see that the size is getting really close to the limit, and that's without all of the mentioned features enabled. Meanwhile, I'll keep working on the patch I said I'd do which trims down the size of all of this code. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
