Re: ld lma assignment

["H. J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>]

On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 11:22:57AM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 11:04:15AM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote:
> > 1. It doesn't check if there are overlapping LMAs when warning moving
> > dot backwards.
> 
> That's why it is a warning rather than an error.  I think anyone setting
> a section VMA to a value before previous sections ought to also set
> section LMA.

If that is the case, I'd rather to see an error especially if we decide
not to make an exception for this to switch back the old default LMA.

> 
> > 2. I don't think we should change lma just because dot is moved
> > backwards. We can change the affected linker scripts if they can be
> > made backward compatible.
> 
> Well, yes, I don't really like the exception to the rule.  Are there
> released linux kernels that need the old default LMA for their linker
> scripts to work?

I think at least 2.6.9 kernel uses vsyscall, which expects the old
default LMA.


H.J.