Re: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?

[Lu, Yinghai]

Did you use my new ldscripts.lds?

Also you need to change you FALLBACK_SIZE in MB Option.lb to 0x40000

YH

-----Original Message-----
From: beneo [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 5:26 PM
To: Lu, Yinghai; Ronald G Minnich
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?

thanks for the help, otherwise, I probably would spend days to figure
out. I
create a cace_as_ram.lds in my directory which handles the section not
in
standard lds, I can build now.

Only mystery still remain is why when I have ROM_IMAGE_SIZE set to
0x20000
in fallback, it won't build, but set to smaller 0x16380, it builds. It
seems
caused objcopy to generate a different size of linuxbios.strip file. I
think
objcopy should have nothing to do with it. but something went wrong
before
that. It should be a bug in the code, I just don't know what it is.

Thanks

beneo

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lu, Yinghai" 
To: "beneo" ; "Ronald G Minnich" 
Cc: 
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 3:29 PM
Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?
> You can change section name in arch/i386/Config.lb if you have strange
> compiler that produce werid section name.
>
> YH
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: beneo [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 3:22 PM
> To: Lu, Yinghai; Ronald G Minnich
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?
>
> Is gcc 3.4 a requirement?
>
> If not, I would save the trouble and stay with 3.2.2. I didn't

encounter
> any
> trouble building LinuxBIOS using this version until now. In another
> word,
> are you absulutely sure the issue I have stated is caused by gcc 3.2.2
>
> Thanks
>
> beneo
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Lu, Yinghai" 
> To: "beneo" ; "Ronald G Minnich"

> Cc: 
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 3:17 PM
> Subject: RE: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?
>
> Why not use gcc 3.4....?
>
> YH
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: beneo [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 3:14 PM
> To: Lu, Yinghai; Ronald G Minnich
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?
>
> I understand what you say. It matches what I see in the code. However,
> my
> questions are not addressed, or I didn't understand your explaination.
>
> First, I'm using redhat Linux 9.0, my gcc -v output like this: "gcc
> version
> 3.2.2 20030222 (Red Hat Linux 3.2.2-5)", I hopt it is good enough to
> build
> LinuxBIOS.
>
> Second, tyan/s2891 build generate a section called .rodata.str1.32.

The
> linker script doesn't have anything explict to handle this section. I
> think
> the Linker just patch this section at end of the last  section that

are
> explicitly specified in the Linker script. In tyan/s2891 build, it is
> .id
> section. The .id section is 0x70 bytes below .reset section. The
> .rodata.str1.32 is larger than 0x70 bytes. Therefor, .rodata.str1.32
> will
> overlap with .reset section and cause the build to break. Are you

saying
> my
> compiler caused this issue?
>
> Third, I understand _start must be in the last 64K, are you saying
> objcopy
> would enforce this? To be more specific on my quesiton, when I'm

useing
> ROMCC, my crt0.o is larger than 64K, objcopy would compress certain
> portion
> of crt0.o and make sure _start is in the last 64k?
>
> Thanks
>
> beneo
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Lu, Yinghai" 
> To: "beneo" ; "Ronald G Minnich"

> Cc: 
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 2:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?
> > OK, Let me explain that again:
> >
> > Final LinuxBIOS image = VGABIOS ROM + Normal Image + FallBack Image
> >
> > FallBack Image = PayLoad + linuxbios_ram.n2v + linuxbios_rom
> >
> > Linuxbios_rom  = crt0.S + init.o + id + reset_vector
> >
> > Reset_vector is sit on 0xfffffff0, and at the very beginning, reset
> > happen, the ROM only can be accessed in 64K range. So need to make
>
> sure
> > _start in crt0.S need to stay in last 64 address range.
> >
> > The init.o will include cache_as_ram_auto.c in the fallback
>
> amd64_main,
> > it will enabled the access 4M flash access.
> >
> > When We were using ROMCC, the crt0.S will be very bigger (it include
> > auto.inc), So for 8 way or 4 way system, It will push out the _start
>
> out
> > of last 64K.
> >
> > When We are using CAR, the init.o is all the same size for 8way and

2
> > way system. ( because CAR use gcc, and have real stack for

functional
> > call, ROMCC can not have stack because of limited regs)
> >
> > Another problem is if put set ROM_IMAGE_SIZE too big, the current

lds
> > can not curbe crt0.S to stay in last 64K too...
> >
> > So you need to set your ROM_IMAGE_SIZE carefully for FALLBACK image.
> > If it is too small, it could not fit Payload
> > +linuxbios_ram.n2v+linuxbios.rom
> >
> > It it is too big, _start in crt0.S will out of last 64K....
> >
> > Later we could modify .lds to force crt0.S and init.o stay in last
> > 64K....
> >
> > Or change Linuxbios_rom = init.o + crt0.S + id + reset_vector.... (
>
> need
> > make sure enable_rom in 64K too...)
> >
> > But is not high priority, because crt0.S+init.o for CAR are always
> > small....
> >
> > Other problem is you must use Linux otherthan Redhat and Suse????
> > And you need to upgrade your gcc
> >
> > YH
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: beneo [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 11:54 AM
> > To: Lu, Yinghai; Ronald G Minnich
> > Cc: [e-mail]
> > Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?
> >
> > Thanks. It works on one of issues I have encountered.
> >
> > My immidiate question is why my ROM_IMAGE_SIZE with larger value
>
> 0x20000
> > won't work, but with 0x16380 would work? If you don't tell me this,

I
> > probably would never be able to figure out.
> >
> > My have another issue, It looks like a bug in target tyan/s2891. I'm
> > trying
> > to build tyan/s2891. No matter what I change, I always get a build
>
> error
> > like:
> >
> > gcc -m32 -nostdlib -nostartfiles -static -o linuxbios -T ldscript.ld
> > crt0.o
> > init.o
> > /usr/bin/ld: section .rodata.str1.32 [fffbff80 -> fffc0091] overlaps
> > section
> > .reset [fffbfff0 -> fffbffff]
> > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> > make[1]: *** [linuxbios] Error 1
> >
> > Then I looked at ldscript file, it included
> > southbridge/nvidia/ck804/id.lds
> > file, which looks like this:
> >
> > SECTIONS {
> >         . = (_ROMBASE + ROM_IMAGE_SIZE - 0x80) - (__id_end -
> > __id_start);
> >         .id (.): {
> >                 *(.id)
> >         }
> > }
> >
> > There is no linker script would arrange section .rodata.str1.32. I
>
> guess
> > that just makes linker to patch section .rodata.str1.32 at end of

.id
> > section, which caused the overlap with .reset section.
> >
> > This looks to me is a bug in tyan/s2891. How do I fix this? is that

OK
> > to
> > remove nvidia/ck804/id.lds?
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > beneo
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Lu, Yinghai" 
> > To: "beneo" ; "Ronald G Minnich"
>
> > Cc: 
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 7:39 PM
> > Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?
> > > Please change ROM_IMAGE_SIZE in romimage "fallback" section to
>
> 0x16380
> > > YH

[LinuxBIOS] Build broken?

[beneo]

right, I should try this script when I have fallback ROM_IMAGE_SIZE larger
than 64k. Otherwise I would not be able to build. I will try it.

beneo.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lu, Yinghai" 
To: "beneo" ; "Ronald G Minnich" 
Cc: 
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 5:32 PM
Subject: RE: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?

Did you use my new ldscripts.lds?

Also you need to change you FALLBACK_SIZE in MB Option.lb to 0x40000

YH

-----Original Message-----
From: beneo [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 5:26 PM
To: Lu, Yinghai; Ronald G Minnich
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?

thanks for the help, otherwise, I probably would spend days to figure
out. I
create a cace_as_ram.lds in my directory which handles the section not
in
standard lds, I can build now.

Only mystery still remain is why when I have ROM_IMAGE_SIZE set to
0x20000
in fallback, it won't build, but set to smaller 0x16380, it builds. It
seems
caused objcopy to generate a different size of linuxbios.strip file. I
think
objcopy should have nothing to do with it. but something went wrong
before
that. It should be a bug in the code, I just don't know what it is.

Thanks

beneo

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lu, Yinghai" 
To: "beneo" ; "Ronald G Minnich" 
Cc: 
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 3:29 PM
Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?
> You can change section name in arch/i386/Config.lb if you have strange
> compiler that produce werid section name.
>
> YH
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: beneo [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 3:22 PM
> To: Lu, Yinghai; Ronald G Minnich
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?
>
> Is gcc 3.4 a requirement?
>
> If not, I would save the trouble and stay with 3.2.2. I didn't

encounter
> any
> trouble building LinuxBIOS using this version until now. In another
> word,
> are you absulutely sure the issue I have stated is caused by gcc 3.2.2
>
> Thanks
>
> beneo
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Lu, Yinghai" 
> To: "beneo" ; "Ronald G Minnich"

> Cc: 
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 3:17 PM
> Subject: RE: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?
>
> Why not use gcc 3.4....?
>
> YH
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: beneo [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 3:14 PM
> To: Lu, Yinghai; Ronald G Minnich
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?
>
> I understand what you say. It matches what I see in the code. However,
> my
> questions are not addressed, or I didn't understand your explaination.
>
> First, I'm using redhat Linux 9.0, my gcc -v output like this: "gcc
> version
> 3.2.2 20030222 (Red Hat Linux 3.2.2-5)", I hopt it is good enough to
> build
> LinuxBIOS.
>
> Second, tyan/s2891 build generate a section called .rodata.str1.32.

The
> linker script doesn't have anything explict to handle this section. I
> think
> the Linker just patch this section at end of the last  section that

are
> explicitly specified in the Linker script. In tyan/s2891 build, it is
> .id
> section. The .id section is 0x70 bytes below .reset section. The
> .rodata.str1.32 is larger than 0x70 bytes. Therefor, .rodata.str1.32
> will
> overlap with .reset section and cause the build to break. Are you

saying
> my
> compiler caused this issue?
>
> Third, I understand _start must be in the last 64K, are you saying
> objcopy
> would enforce this? To be more specific on my quesiton, when I'm

useing
> ROMCC, my crt0.o is larger than 64K, objcopy would compress certain
> portion
> of crt0.o and make sure _start is in the last 64k?
>
> Thanks
>
> beneo
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Lu, Yinghai" 
> To: "beneo" ; "Ronald G Minnich"

> Cc: 
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 2:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?
> > OK, Let me explain that again:
> >
> > Final LinuxBIOS image = VGABIOS ROM + Normal Image + FallBack Image
> >
> > FallBack Image = PayLoad + linuxbios_ram.n2v + linuxbios_rom
> >
> > Linuxbios_rom  = crt0.S + init.o + id + reset_vector
> >
> > Reset_vector is sit on 0xfffffff0, and at the very beginning, reset
> > happen, the ROM only can be accessed in 64K range. So need to make
>
> sure
> > _start in crt0.S need to stay in last 64 address range.
> >
> > The init.o will include cache_as_ram_auto.c in the fallback
>
> amd64_main,
> > it will enabled the access 4M flash access.
> >
> > When We were using ROMCC, the crt0.S will be very bigger (it include
> > auto.inc), So for 8 way or 4 way system, It will push out the _start
>
> out
> > of last 64K.
> >
> > When We are using CAR, the init.o is all the same size for 8way and

2
> > way system. ( because CAR use gcc, and have real stack for

functional
> > call, ROMCC can not have stack because of limited regs)
> >
> > Another problem is if put set ROM_IMAGE_SIZE too big, the current

lds
> > can not curbe crt0.S to stay in last 64K too...
> >
> > So you need to set your ROM_IMAGE_SIZE carefully for FALLBACK image.
> > If it is too small, it could not fit Payload
> > +linuxbios_ram.n2v+linuxbios.rom
> >
> > It it is too big, _start in crt0.S will out of last 64K....
> >
> > Later we could modify .lds to force crt0.S and init.o stay in last
> > 64K....
> >
> > Or change Linuxbios_rom = init.o + crt0.S + id + reset_vector.... (
>
> need
> > make sure enable_rom in 64K too...)
> >
> > But is not high priority, because crt0.S+init.o for CAR are always
> > small....
> >
> > Other problem is you must use Linux otherthan Redhat and Suse????
> > And you need to upgrade your gcc
> >
> > YH
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: beneo [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 11:54 AM
> > To: Lu, Yinghai; Ronald G Minnich
> > Cc: [e-mail]
> > Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?
> >
> > Thanks. It works on one of issues I have encountered.
> >
> > My immidiate question is why my ROM_IMAGE_SIZE with larger value
>
> 0x20000
> > won't work, but with 0x16380 would work? If you don't tell me this,

I
> > probably would never be able to figure out.
> >
> > My have another issue, It looks like a bug in target tyan/s2891. I'm
> > trying
> > to build tyan/s2891. No matter what I change, I always get a build
>
> error
> > like:
> >
> > gcc -m32 -nostdlib -nostartfiles -static -o linuxbios -T ldscript.ld
> > crt0.o
> > init.o
> > /usr/bin/ld: section .rodata.str1.32 [fffbff80 -> fffc0091] overlaps
> > section
> > .reset [fffbfff0 -> fffbffff]
> > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> > make[1]: *** [linuxbios] Error 1
> >
> > Then I looked at ldscript file, it included
> > southbridge/nvidia/ck804/id.lds
> > file, which looks like this:
> >
> > SECTIONS {
> >         . = (_ROMBASE + ROM_IMAGE_SIZE - 0x80) - (__id_end -
> > __id_start);
> >         .id (.): {
> >                 *(.id)
> >         }
> > }
> >
> > There is no linker script would arrange section .rodata.str1.32. I
>
> guess
> > that just makes linker to patch section .rodata.str1.32 at end of

.id
> > section, which caused the overlap with .reset section.
> >
> > This looks to me is a bug in tyan/s2891. How do I fix this? is that

OK
> > to
> > remove nvidia/ck804/id.lds?
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > beneo
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Lu, Yinghai" 
> > To: "beneo" ; "Ronald G Minnich"
>
> > Cc: 
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 7:39 PM
> > Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Build broken?
> > > Please change ROM_IMAGE_SIZE in romimage "fallback" section to
>
> 0x16380
> > > YH