Re: .section ... "ax" vs #alloc, #execinstr

From: Daniel Jacobowitz (dan@debian.org)
Date: Tue Apr 15 2003 - 18:06:04 EST

Next message: Andrew Morton: "Re: 2.5.67-mm3: Bad: scheduling while atomic with IEEE1394 then hard freeze ( lockup on CPU0)"
Previous message: Russell King: "Re: .section ... "ax" vs #alloc, #execinstr"
In reply to: Eli Carter: ".section ... "ax" vs #alloc, #execinstr"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Tue, Apr 15, 2003 at 03:06:34PM -0500, Eli Carter wrote:
> Some of the assembly files use
> .section ".start", "ax"
> and others use
> .section ".start", #alloc, #execinstr
> (and not just for .start, try
> find -name \*.S | xargs grep -e '\.section'
> )
>
> These appear to be equivelent, if not somebody clue me in please. :)

They're equivalent.

> Which is the prefered form? The latter seems to provide a bit more for
> the human, so I'd vote that direction... ;)

Well, GCC prefers the former. Binutils will accept either; they have
historically different origins.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Andrew Morton: "Re: 2.5.67-mm3: Bad: scheduling while atomic with IEEE1394 then hard freeze ( lockup on CPU0)"
Previous message: Russell King: "Re: .section ... "ax" vs #alloc, #execinstr"
In reply to: Eli Carter: ".section ... "ax" vs #alloc, #execinstr"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 15 2003 - 22:00:37 EST