[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080223175306.GA15186@uranus.ravnborg.org>
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 18:53:06 +0100
From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
To: Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...lshack.com>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, mm-commits@...r.kernel.org,
Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...tmail.fm>
Subject: Re: Lump xxxinit together with init if possible (was Re: Solve section mismatch for free_area_init_core.)
Hi Alexander.
> I more than less expected people to scream "ugly, ugly!".
That was my first thought and the reason why it stayed in my inbox
for so long.
But I could not find a better way to do it. We could do it in
different ways but not better.
> Maybe you could consider the following patch, instead?
> In non-HOTPLUG configurations, devinit and init sections in vmlinux
> are lumped together during the final link. There is no good reason
> to warn about section mismatches between them in this case, because
> all code is discarded at the same time. This patch moves the lumping-
> together to the compile stage, which makes the unnecessary warnings
> go away. Same for MEMORY_HOTPLUG/meminit and HOTPLUG_CPU/cpuinit.
>From the commit where the seperate section were introduced:
Introducing separate sections for __dev* (HOTPLUG),
__cpu* (HOTPLUG_CPU) and __mem* (MEMORY_HOTPLUG)
allows us to do a much more reliable Section mismatch
check in modpost. We are no longer dependent on the actual
configuration of for example HOTPLUG.
I think that explains it.
Sam
--
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