[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] define GRUB_MOD_ALIGN to 0 on non-ieee1275 (Re: does module
From: |
Pavel Roskin |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] define GRUB_MOD_ALIGN to 0 on non-ieee1275 (Re: does module area require alignment? (Re: [PATCH] i386-qemu port)) |
Date: |
Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:51:43 -0400 |
On Mon, 2009-06-22 at 22:41 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 03:43:17PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-06-22 at 14:31 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> > > Well it seems that OLPC (i386-ieee1275) needs alignment, but coreboot
> > > doesn't.
> > > It must be some OFW-specific oddity.
> > >
> > > This patch makes the alignment ieee1275-specific on i386.
> >
> > We can define GRUB_MOD_ALIGN to 1 for such architectures and keep using
> > ALIGN_UP (or remove ALIGN_UP - it doesn't matter). The value of 0 for
> > GRUB_MOD_ALIGN is meaningless, but the value of 1 has a meaning - align
> > to a byte boundary.
>
> Good idea, I just did that. I didn't remove ALIGN_UP, since it's harmless.
By the way, it turns out that PowerPC needs alignment of 4 bytes. That
would allow me to find the exact minimal gap and see if it's influenced
by anything. The gap is between 0x8c50 and 0x8c60.
You may want to use 4 byte alignment too. It's a good thing to align
32-bit addresses in the ELF headers.
--
Regards,
Pavel Roskin
- [PATCH] i386-qemu port, Robert Millan, 2009/06/21
- does module area require alignment? (Re: [PATCH] i386-qemu port), Robert Millan, 2009/06/21
- Re: does module area require alignment? (Re: [PATCH] i386-qemu port), Pavel Roskin, 2009/06/21
- Re: does module area require alignment? (Re: [PATCH] i386-qemu port), Robert Millan, 2009/06/21
- [PATCH] define GRUB_MOD_ALIGN to 0 on non-ieee1275 (Re: does module area require alignment? (Re: [PATCH] i386-qemu port)), Robert Millan, 2009/06/22
- Re: [PATCH] define GRUB_MOD_ALIGN to 0 on non-ieee1275 (Re: does module area require alignment? (Re: [PATCH] i386-qemu port)), Pavel Roskin, 2009/06/22
- Re: [PATCH] define GRUB_MOD_ALIGN to 0 on non-ieee1275 (Re: does module area require alignment? (Re: [PATCH] i386-qemu port)), Robert Millan, 2009/06/22
- Re: [PATCH] define GRUB_MOD_ALIGN to 0 on non-ieee1275 (Re: does module area require alignment? (Re: [PATCH] i386-qemu port)),
Pavel Roskin <=
- Re: [PATCH] define GRUB_MOD_ALIGN to 0 on non-ieee1275 (Re: does module area require alignment? (Re: [PATCH] i386-qemu port)), Robert Millan, 2009/06/22
- Re: [PATCH] define GRUB_MOD_ALIGN to 0 on non-ieee1275 (Re: does module area require alignment? (Re: [PATCH] i386-qemu port)), Pavel Roskin, 2009/06/22
- Re: [PATCH] define GRUB_MOD_ALIGN to 0 on non-ieee1275 (Re: does module area require alignment? (Re: [PATCH] i386-qemu port)), Robert Millan, 2009/06/22
- Re: does module area require alignment? (Re: [PATCH] i386-qemu port), Pavel Roskin, 2009/06/22
- Re: does module area require alignment? (Re: [PATCH] i386-qemu port), Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko, 2009/06/22
- Re: does module area require alignment? (Re: [PATCH] i386-qemu port), Pavel Roskin, 2009/06/22
[PATCH] move grub_stop() (Re: [PATCH] i386-qemu port), Robert Millan, 2009/06/21