[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080428164807.GW2813@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 19:48:07 +0300
From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...lshack.com>,
jdike@...toit.com
Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] fs/buffer.c:init_buffer() mustn't be inline
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 09:01:42AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 28 Apr 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> <
> > This patch fixes the following build error with UML and gcc 4.3:
> >
> > <-- snip -->
> >
> > ...
> > CC fs/buffer.o
> > /home/bunk/linux/kernel-2.6/git/linux-2.6/fs/buffer.c: In function ‘init_page_buffers’:
> > /home/bunk/linux/kernel-2.6/git/linux-2.6/fs/buffer.c:51: sorry, unimplemented: inlining failed in call to ‘init_buffer’: function body not available
> > /home/bunk/linux/kernel-2.6/git/linux-2.6/fs/buffer.c:1007: sorry, unimplemented: called from here
> > make[2]: *** [fs/buffer.o] Error 1
>
> Can somebody tell why this is not a gcc bug?
It is a gcc bug.
But having a global function marked as extern was already questionable,
and all assumptions an "inline" would always inline the code are anyway
now broken in your tree.
So let's work around a gcc bug by fixing the kernel...
> Linus
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
--
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