[coreboot] CBFS transition plan

Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net
Tue May 5 17:42:12 CEST 2009

On 05.05.2009 17:24, Myles Watson wrote:
> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 9:20 AM, ron minnich <rminnich at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 8:13 AM, Myles Watson <mylesgw at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2. Delete - Delete works on the assumption that you want contiguous files
>>>    a. I'm not convinced that fixed CBFS areas will be simpler than
>>> ldscripts.  I consider them both ugly.
>> How are we going to support code that runs at a fixed address? I can
>> only come up with
>> these two options. I think the PIE stuff from v3 is not an option:
>> we've been warned about
>> it for a while now, and I now believe the warnings.
> I wish I knew the best answer here.

Although some people have talked about the evilness of PIE, I believe it
still is the best way forward. And if GCC ever deprecates our usage of
that mode, LLVM people seem to be happy to accommodate fringe use cases
if it gets them improved regression tests or some press attention or a
thank you note.



More information about the coreboot mailing list