This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Section garbage collection problem

From: Denys Vlasenko <vda dot linux at googlemail dot com>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
Cc: binutils at sourceware dot org, "H.J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>, Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 21:02:34 +0100
Subject: Re: Section garbage collection problem
References: <200709161942.25443.vda.linux@googlemail.com> <20070916190113.GA25678@caradoc.them.org>

On Sunday 16 September 2007 20:01, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 07:42:25PM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > What do you think about it? Will such patch to as be acceptable in principle?
> > Maybe you can think about better solution?
> 
> The section name is irrelevant.  You just want a bunch of .smp_locks
> sections in one object file that are not automatically combined into
> one larger .smp_locks section per object.  That's perfectly fine ELF
> but I don't think gas can do it.

This will not only need hacking on gas, but also fixing
Linux kernel biuld process to not do intermediate "ld -r"
passes which collect stuff into one built-in.o file 
per source directory.

> Another way would be to do it with assembler macros for now; see \@ in
> the manual.

Now *this* is interesting, will try. Thanks!
--
vda

References:
- Section garbage collection problem
  - From: Denys Vlasenko
- Re: Section garbage collection problem
  - From: Daniel Jacobowitz

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]