Re: [PATCH][RFC] 2.6 && module + -g && kernel w/o -g

[David Mosberger]

>>>>> On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:09:37 -0700, Tom Rini <trini@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:

  Tom> The following patch fixes the problem for me on PPC32:

  Tom> --- 1.96/kernel/module.c	Wed Jan  7 22:46:59 2004
  Tom> +++ edited/kernel/module.c	Wed Jan 14 14:05:12 2004
  Tom> @@ -1439,6 +1439,13 @@
  Tom> strindex = sechdrs[i].sh_link;
  Tom> strtab = (char *)hdr + sechdrs[strindex].sh_offset;
  Tom> }
  Tom> +
  Tom> +		/* If we find any debug RELAs, frob these away now. */
  Tom> +		if (sechdrs[i].sh_type == SHT_RELA &&
  Tom> +				(strstr(secstrings+sechdrs[i].sh_name, ".debug")
  Tom> +				 != 0))
  Tom> +			sechdrs[i].sh_type = SHT_NULL;
  Tom> +
  Tom> #ifndef CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD
  Tom> /* Don't load .exit sections */
  Tom> if (strncmp(secstrings+sechdrs[i].sh_name, ".exit", 5) == 0)

  Tom> IMHO, this shouldn't be covered under a PPC32 test since at
  Tom> least PPC32, PPC64 and Alpha have this issue, and I suspect
  Tom> that ia64, parisc, s390 and v850 have the problem as well
  Tom> (based on what their module_arch_frob bits look to be doing).

As far as ia64 is concerned, adding a check for .debug should be OK,
but since the debug sections do not have any relocs anyhow, it
shouldn't make much of a difference one way or another (addresses in
the debug section a segment-relative).

	--david
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/