From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-ve0-x244.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400c:c01::244]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1VVhnm-0005Ii-Iq for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 14 Oct 2013 13:03:15 +0000 Received: by mail-ve0-f196.google.com with SMTP id oz11so213808veb.3 for ; Mon, 14 Oct 2013 06:02:50 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 21:02:49 +0800 Message-ID: From: Kevin Du Huanpeng List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: barebox.lds.S, why _edata not follows the end of .data section? To: barebox@lists.infradead.org Hi, in the linker script, > _sdata = .; >. = ALIGN(4); > .data : { *(.data*) } ? why _edata is not here? > . = .; > __barebox_cmd_start = .; > .barebox_cmd : { KEEP(*(SORT_BY_NAME(.barebox_cmd*))) } > more.... > __dynsym_start = .; > *(.dynsym) > __dynsym_end = .; > } > _edata = .; > . = ALIGN(4); > __bss_start = .; why _edata is there? other sections between _sdata and _edata, are they needed to be modified? duhuanpeng _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox