lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:24:22 -0700 From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com> To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> CC: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, "linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, akpm <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: RE: [PATCH -next] ia64/sn: fix percpu warnings > Umm... the correct correct declaration and definition would be > > DECLARE_PER_CPU(short [MAX_COMPACT_NODES], __sn_cnodeide_to_nasid); > > and > > DEFINE_PER_CPU(short [MAX_COMPACT_NODES], __sn_cnodeide_to_nasid); > > So that the first part contains full type. Doing it the other way > might cause problems if the __weak trick is turned on. That's what Randy's patch uses ... but doing it the "right" way gives me the "has no CRC!" warning. This seems to be a feature of exported per cpu arrays. If I hack up a driver to make use of softirq_work_list, I see a similar no CRC warning for it. Is this problem in the ia64 tool chain[1]? Or do other architectures have problems with exported per cpu arrays? -Tony [1] My default toolchain is uses gcc 4.1.2. But 4.4.1 has the same behavior. -- 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