Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 12:32:56PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> - Why we have defined the location of the crash backup region twice. > > Hi Eric, > > Are you referring to BACKUP_REGION_START and BACKUP_START declarations?
Yes. > I am not sure why did I do that, may be somehow I thought that purgatory > code is not sharing the header files with main kexec code base. > Please have a look at the patch attached for i386. If this looks > fine, I shall generate the patches for x86_64 and ppc64 too. It's not ideal, as the header include is ugly. But it does remove that duplicate definition and makes the code much more maintainable. So I guess it looks good to me. If you can compile the ppc64 code could you please track down what undefined symbol in ppc64 purgatory code is? Unless I can find a good explanation I'm going to reinstitute the die when undefined symbols are detected which will kill break ppc64. Eric _______________________________________________ fastboot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/fastboot
