On 04/27/2016 02:01 PM, David Miller wrote:
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.
Also, perhaps think about a way to make the assembler emit something
fatal instead of a warning when this situation occurs? People tend to
ignore warnings. ;)
Rob
--
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
