[LinuxBIOS] support PIC and prototypes

Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net
Thu Aug 30 05:30:15 CEST 2007

Hi Ron,

maybe it would make sense to include your mail almost verbatim in
newboot.lyx. IIRC newboot.lyx seemed to suggest a different code flow.


On 30.08.2007 00:25, ron minnich wrote:
> I am confusing you, maybe.
> stage0 is not pic. stage0 is non-pic. initram is pic. initram, which
> is pic, needs to call stage0, which is not pic.
> To add to the fun, stage0 does make one call to initram: it calls
> initram's main.
> On 8/29/07, Peter Stuge <peter at stuge.se> wrote:
>> Please don't use stage0 to tag the PIC code, use pic instead.
>> stage0printk would become picprintk, or maybe pic_printk.
> this implies to me that the printk itself is pic, which it is not. Another name?
>> I would like that file to be called just pic.o and be unrelated to
>> anything stage0 - except of course that stage0 calls the code in
>> pic.o.
> except that file IS stage0.o. It's stage0 with all the symbols
> renamed. What do we call them?
>> I think the method is great but I want to choose all filenames
>> carefully so it is really clear what is going on.
>> Btw - why couldn't everyone call the PIC functions?
> stage0 is not pic. If we make it pic, it ballons. When gcc generates
> PIC code, it still generates relative calls. Gcc is not tremendously
> good at generating PIC, what it really creates is "PIC assuming you
> use the GNU shared library techniques".

More information about the coreboot mailing list