[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090321160102.7b5a9675@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 16:01:02 +0100
From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] trace/ring_buffer: fix section mismatch warning
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:39:11 +0100
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> > Section mismatch in reference from the function
> > ring_buffer_alloc() to the function .cpuinit.text:rb_cpu_notify()
> > The function ring_buffer_alloc() references the function __cpuinit
> > rb_cpu_notify(). This is often because ring_buffer_alloc lacks a
> > __cpuinit annotation or the annotation of rb_cpu_notify is wrong.
> >
> > This is a false positive since rb_cpu_notify gets only referenced
> > if CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU=y. To get rid of the warning annotate
> > ring_buffer_alloc with __ref.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
> > ---
> > kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c | 2 +-
>
> Frederic has beaten you to it narrowly:
>
> 09c9e84: tracing/ring-buffer: don't annotate rb_cpu_notify with __cpuinit
Btw. that was the only section mismatch warning I got on linux-next
with an allyesconfig on s390. We probably could enable the verbose
section mismatch warnings at compile time?
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