From owner-freebsd-current Tue Sep 3 13:55:50 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2FDC37B400 for ; Tue, 3 Sep 2002 13:55:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DE0B943E6A for ; Tue, 3 Sep 2002 13:55:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tmoestl@gmx.net) Received: (qmail 19493 invoked by uid 0); 3 Sep 2002 20:55:44 -0000 Received: from pd9e16c85.dip.t-dialin.net (HELO forge.local) (217.225.108.133) by mail.gmx.net (mp019-rz3) with SMTP; 3 Sep 2002 20:55:44 -0000 Received: from tmm by forge.local with local (Exim 3.36 #1) id 17mKib-0003Wf-00; Tue, 03 Sep 2002 22:56:13 +0200 Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 22:56:13 +0200 From: Thomas Moestl To: Matthew Dillon Cc: Peter Wemm , ticso@cicely.de, Alexander Kabaev , ticso@cicely5.cicely.de, des@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG, dillon@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: alpha tinderbox failure - kernel is broken. Message-ID: <20020903205613.GE441@crow.dom2ip.de> Mail-Followup-To: Matthew Dillon , Peter Wemm , ticso@cicely.de, Alexander Kabaev , ticso@cicely5.cicely.de, des@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG, dillon@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20020903161933.GB80508@cicely5.cicely.de> <20020903163714.049602A7D6@canning.wemm.org> <20020903175819.GA441@crow.dom2ip.de> <200209031821.g83IL5Wd058341@apollo.backplane.com> <20020903183248.GC441@crow.dom2ip.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020903183248.GC441@crow.dom2ip.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 2002/09/03 at 20:32:48 +0200, Thomas Moestl wrote: > On Tue, 2002/09/03 at 11:21:05 -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote: > > I am also still somewhat worried about the data segment start address > > and I am wondering if I should remove the if (data_addr == 0) > > and instead unconditionally set data_addr to the last data segment > > loaded (which is what the original code did). > > That would only allow to shrink bss, but since that seems to be the > traditional behaviour (and it's not likely that anybody would like to > shrink away other segments), that would probably better. Huh, that should read data+bss for usual elf binaries which share the two in one segment (and there seems to be some code around in other places that expect binaries formed with only two PT_LOAD segments). Assuming that, setting data_addr conditionally or unconditionally should not make any difference, it will always be set for the first data PT_LOAD segment and there will be only one (the other one will be text). Sorry for the confusion, - Thomas -- Thomas Moestl http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0015675/ http://people.FreeBSD.org/~tmm/ PGP fingerprint: 1C97 A604 2BD0 E492 51D0 9C0F 1FE6 4F1D 419C 776C To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message