Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-06-01 Thread Bernhard Walle
* Bernhard Walle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-28 16:39]: > * Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-28 13:09]: > > On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 12:54:42PM +0200, Bernhard Walle wrote: > > > * Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-01 07:06]: > > > > This seems to be a problem with gdb 6.5. I

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-06-01 Thread Bernhard Walle
* Bernhard Walle [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-05-28 16:39]: * Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-05-28 13:09]: On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 12:54:42PM +0200, Bernhard Walle wrote: * Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-05-01 07:06]: This seems to be a problem with gdb 6.5. I transferred the dump

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-05-28 Thread Andi Kleen
On Monday 28 May 2007 12:54:42 Bernhard Walle wrote: > * Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-01 07:06]: > > This seems to be a problem with gdb 6.5. I transferred the dump to a > > different machine having GNU gdb 6.4, and it works fine there. > > What's the state of it? Andy, was the GDB

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-05-28 Thread Bernhard Walle
* Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-28 13:09]: > On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 12:54:42PM +0200, Bernhard Walle wrote: > > * Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-01 07:06]: > > > This seems to be a problem with gdb 6.5. I transferred the dump to a > > > different machine having GNU gdb 6.4,

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-05-28 Thread Vivek Goyal
On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 12:54:42PM +0200, Bernhard Walle wrote: > * Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-01 07:06]: > > This seems to be a problem with gdb 6.5. I transferred the dump to a > > different machine having GNU gdb 6.4, and it works fine there. > > What's the state of it? Andy, was

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-05-28 Thread Bernhard Walle
* Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-01 07:06]: > This seems to be a problem with gdb 6.5. I transferred the dump to a > different machine having GNU gdb 6.4, and it works fine there. What's the state of it? Andy, was the GDB breakage the reason why you didn't merge it? Did someone file a

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-05-28 Thread Bernhard Walle
* Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-05-01 07:06]: This seems to be a problem with gdb 6.5. I transferred the dump to a different machine having GNU gdb 6.4, and it works fine there. What's the state of it? Andy, was the GDB breakage the reason why you didn't merge it? Did someone file a GDB

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-05-28 Thread Vivek Goyal
On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 12:54:42PM +0200, Bernhard Walle wrote: * Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-05-01 07:06]: This seems to be a problem with gdb 6.5. I transferred the dump to a different machine having GNU gdb 6.4, and it works fine there. What's the state of it? Andy, was the GDB

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-05-28 Thread Bernhard Walle
* Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-05-28 13:09]: On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 12:54:42PM +0200, Bernhard Walle wrote: * Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-05-01 07:06]: This seems to be a problem with gdb 6.5. I transferred the dump to a different machine having GNU gdb 6.4, and it works

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-05-28 Thread Andi Kleen
On Monday 28 May 2007 12:54:42 Bernhard Walle wrote: * Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-05-01 07:06]: This seems to be a problem with gdb 6.5. I transferred the dump to a different machine having GNU gdb 6.4, and it works fine there. What's the state of it? Andy, was the GDB breakage

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-05-01 Thread Vivek Goyal
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 11:54:22PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 11:26:50PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > >> Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > >> > >> >> At least without a core file it is working on with

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-05-01 Thread Vivek Goyal
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 11:54:22PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 11:26:50PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At least without a core file it is working on with gdb 6.4. This

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-30 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 11:26:50PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> >> >> At least without a core file it is working on with gdb 6.4. >> >> >> > >> > This seems to be a problem with gdb 6.5. I transferred

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-30 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> At least without a core file it is working on with gdb 6.4. >> > > This seems to be a problem with gdb 6.5. I transferred the dump to a > different machine having GNU gdb 6.4, and it works fine there. Ok. The difference between those two symbols

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-30 Thread Andi Kleen
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 11:26:50PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >> At least without a core file it is working on with gdb 6.4. > >> > > > > This seems to be a problem with gdb 6.5. I transferred the dump to a > > different machine having GNU gdb

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-30 Thread Vivek Goyal
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 10:20:53PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 05:17:07PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > >> On Monday 30 April 2007 17:12:39 Eric W. Biederman wrote: > >> > > >> > Currently because vmlinux does not reflect

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-30 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 05:17:07PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: >> On Monday 30 April 2007 17:12:39 Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> > >> > Currently because vmlinux does not reflect that the kernel is relocatable >> > we still have to support

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-30 Thread Vivek Goyal
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 05:17:07PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Monday 30 April 2007 17:12:39 Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > > > Currently because vmlinux does not reflect that the kernel is relocatable > > we still have to support CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START. So this patch adds a small > > c program

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-30 Thread Andi Kleen
On Monday 30 April 2007 17:12:39 Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > Currently because vmlinux does not reflect that the kernel is relocatable > we still have to support CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START. So this patch adds a small > c program to do what we cannot do with a linker script set the elf header > type

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-30 Thread Andi Kleen
On Monday 30 April 2007 17:12:39 Eric W. Biederman wrote: Currently because vmlinux does not reflect that the kernel is relocatable we still have to support CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START. So this patch adds a small c program to do what we cannot do with a linker script set the elf header type to

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-30 Thread Vivek Goyal
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 05:17:07PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: On Monday 30 April 2007 17:12:39 Eric W. Biederman wrote: Currently because vmlinux does not reflect that the kernel is relocatable we still have to support CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START. So this patch adds a small c program to do what

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-30 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 05:17:07PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: On Monday 30 April 2007 17:12:39 Eric W. Biederman wrote: Currently because vmlinux does not reflect that the kernel is relocatable we still have to support CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START. So this

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-30 Thread Vivek Goyal
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 10:20:53PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 05:17:07PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: On Monday 30 April 2007 17:12:39 Eric W. Biederman wrote: Currently because vmlinux does not reflect that the kernel is

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-30 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At least without a core file it is working on with gdb 6.4. This seems to be a problem with gdb 6.5. I transferred the dump to a different machine having GNU gdb 6.4, and it works fine there. Ok. The difference between those two symbols didn't seem to

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-30 Thread Andi Kleen
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 11:26:50PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At least without a core file it is working on with gdb 6.4. This seems to be a problem with gdb 6.5. I transferred the dump to a different machine having GNU gdb 6.4, and it

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-30 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 11:26:50PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At least without a core file it is working on with gdb 6.4. This seems to be a problem with gdb 6.5. I transferred the dump to a different

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-24 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at 11:12:13PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> Currently because vmlinux does not reflect that the kernel is relocatable >> we still have to support CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START. So this patch adds a small >> c program to do what we

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-24 Thread Vivek Goyal
On Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at 11:12:13PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > Currently because vmlinux does not reflect that the kernel is relocatable > we still have to support CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START. So this patch adds a small > c program to do what we cannot do with a linker script, set the elf

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-24 Thread Vivek Goyal
On Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at 11:12:13PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: Currently because vmlinux does not reflect that the kernel is relocatable we still have to support CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START. So this patch adds a small c program to do what we cannot do with a linker script, set the elf header

Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64: Reflect the relocatability of the kernel in the ELF header.

2007-04-24 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at 11:12:13PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: Currently because vmlinux does not reflect that the kernel is relocatable we still have to support CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START. So this patch adds a small c program to do what we cannot do