Re: [PATCH] Restructure BSS linker script macros.

[Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>]

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 06:58:50PM -0400, Tim Abbott wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jul 2009, Tim Abbott wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 16 Jul 2009, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 06:23:33PM -0400, Tim Abbott wrote:
> > > > I'd like acks from Sam and David on this one.  Also CCing Paul, since
> > > > he has a patch from me which will need to be updated to use
> > > > BSS_SECTION(0, PAGE_SIZE, 4) once this gets merged.
> [...]
> > > Could you please resend including the necessary fix for mn10300 so we do not
> > > break bisecting.
> > 
> > I don't understand what you're asking here.  The original patch I sent 
> > does include the necessary fix for mn10300 in the first hunk (reproduced 
> > below).  I intentionally changed the mn10300 use at the same time as 
> > changing the macros in order to avoid breaking bisecting.
> 
> I realized that you probably meant that I should resend the sh patch that 
> I have currently in linux-next via Paul's tree that is broken by this 
> change.
> 
> Paul -- the patch below differs from the version have in two ways:
> (1) I updated it to use the fixed BSS linker script macros from this 
> thread.
> (2) I dropped the hunk that conflicted with a similar change in the percpu 
> tree[2], as the version of that change in the percpu tree is better.

I do not expect Tejun's work to be included until next merge window.
It would be nice if we could queue up a lot of vmlinux.lds
cleanup patches so they are ready for next merge window.
But we should rely on the arch maintainers mostly - as you nicely
have done for sh here.

	Sam