Jun Sun wrote: > (Sent to linux-kernel, but seems nobody cared. Hopefully someone here > can pick it up)
I've included uclinux-dev@uclinux.org, because that's where I've seen most discussion of FLAT format in general. > Apparently newer GCC would generate ANCHOR symbols beyond the end of > data/bss segment on ARM CPUs. As a result, the exiting validity checking > for relocation symbols in FLAT format will fail for some programs. > -#define flat_reloc_valid(reloc, size) ((reloc) <= (size)) > +#define flat_reloc_valid(reloc, size) ((reloc) <= (size) + > 0x1000) Why 0x1000? Is that an arbitrary number, or does it have a specific meaning for GCC? > This also fixes a cosmetic error in printk. Text segment and data/bss > segment are allocated from two different areas. It is not meaningful to > give the diff between them in error reporting messages. That part looks fine to me. -- Jamie ps. Russell, proof that someone is using no-MMU ARM? :-) I'll get back to your earlier mail on that subject when I have more time, btw. _______________________________________________ uClinux-dev mailing list uClinux-dev@uclinux.org http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org To unsubscribe see: http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/options/uclinux-dev