[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20061006192520.GB8620@goober>
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 12:25:21 -0700
From: Valerie Henson <val_henson@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Helge Deller <deller@...isc-linux.org>,
Kyle McMartin <kyle@...isc-linux.org>,
Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: More info on section mismatches (was Re: [PATCH] [TULIP] Fix section mismatch in de2104x.c)
On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 02:39:41PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> >From: Helge Deller <deller@...isc-linux.org>
> >
> >WARNING: drivers/net/tulip/de2104x.o - Section mismatch: reference to
> >.init.text:de_init_one from .data.rel.local after 'de_driver' (at offset
> >0x20)
> >WARNING: drivers/net/tulip/de2104x.o - Section mismatch: reference to
> >.exit.text:de_remove_one from .data.rel.local after 'de_driver' (at offset
> >0x28)
>
> I'm a bit blind, so help me out here... what precisely is mismatched?
>
> AFAICS everything is properly marked __init or __exit.
(Cc'd Richard Henderson as resident gcc guru.)
We're discussing a way to get more information out of section mismatch
reports so that the causes of section mismatches are a little more
obvious. I'd like to see something like:
foo() is marked __init at line 34
bar() calls foo() at line 57
Arjan points out that optimization may make this difficult; I'm happy
with a separate script running at a lower level of optimization that
you can run by hand when one of these warnings shows up.
Ideas?
-VAL
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists