[RFC PATCH 00/10] Improve ARM target's support for LLVM toolchain

Heinrich Schuchardt xypron.glpk at gmx.de
Mon May 22 22:15:10 CEST 2023

Am 22. Mai 2023 21:37:26 MESZ schrieb Sam Edwards <cfsworks at gmail.com>:
>Hi Ilias,
>On 5/22/23 00:52, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
>> I can help clean up the arm architecture even further.  I was toying
>> with the idea of having page-aligned sections and eventually map
>> u-boot with proper permissions per section.  Right now (at least for
>> the majority of arm platforms) we are doing RWX for all the memory,
>> apart from devices that are mapped as RW. I do have an awfully hacky
>> PoC around, but the linker script cleanup is more than welcome.
>Glad to hear it (and excited by the idea of proper W^X)! The linker script cleanup (i.e. deleting those pesky `sections.c` files and going back to linker-assigned symbols) can really happen whenever; it won't cause a problem on any version of GNU ld from <7 years ago. Perhaps a series of patches (one per arch) doing that should be landed first?
>> It's probably not a mailing list issue.  I only got the efi related
>> patches on my mailbox.  The recipients were generated with
>> get_maintainers.pl?  Heinirch and I only received the efi* portions as
>> we maintain that subsystem
>Well, it's true that you and Heinrich weren't Cc: on every email in the series. I just went with patman's default behavior.
>But every patch was sent To: the u-boot list, and I do see the whole series showing up on the archive. Did you not even receive the other patches in the series via the list?

The series can be retrieved from patchwork. I personally dislike patman for this eclectic behavior. Git send-email is doing the expected.

Best regards



More information about the U-Boot mailing list