[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090419135639.GA28919@elte.hu>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 15:56:39 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@...il.com>
Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rakib.mullick@...il.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86: Fix false positive section mismatch
warnings in the apic code
* Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@...il.com> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> >> tip-bot for Rakib Mullick pisze:
> >>> Commit-ID: aa57a15ad17d284e62fbd24cf7e0eb628b2cb3f7
> >>> Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/aa57a15ad17d284e62fbd24cf7e0eb628b2cb3f7
> >>> Author: Rakib Mullick <rakib.mullick@...il.com>
> >>> AuthorDate: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 08:41:17 +0600
> >>> Committer: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> >>> CommitDate: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 11:28:18 +0200
> >>>
> >>> x86: Fix false positive section mismatch warnings in the apic code
> >>>
> >>> find_unisys_acpi_oem_table() and unmap_unisys_acpi_oem_table()
> >>> are non init functions, but these functions calls some init
> >>> functions. But we need these functions as non-init functions.
> >> Why? This warning seems to be valid.
> >
> > It's put into struct apic::acpi_madt_oem_check - which is a
> > non-init structure. That particular field is only used from init
> > context - but other fields are used all the time.
>
> Can we have a rule that "every __ref usage should have a comment
> explaining why __ref is safe in this place"?
Yes, that's prudent.
Ingo
--
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