> Am 01.03.2010 09:00, schrieb Bao, Zheng: > > What I keep trying to make everyone understand is not what the rules we > > should use to decide the stack size. What I worry is the bug in the > > crosstool will make the rule do the wrong thing, even if the rule is > > perfect. So far, no one seems to support me that there is a bug in the > > toolchain. I don't think you should feel like it's a lack of support. We just want to fix it to make it simpler at the same time. > Solution to that: Move operations on non-addresses and non-sizes out of > sections (which you did in your patch) > > However, this does not fix the bug in our stack size calculation. > I'm not quite sure if the patch does the right thing, but it should be > close. I don't think we need to make the SMP check. Can't we just put in an assert that checks for RAMBASE < 0xa0000 and eheap > 0xa0000? One large stack could just as easily break this.
Thanks, Myles -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
