[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100223184104.GA6325@debian>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 00:11:04 +0530
From: Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Abhishek Sagar <sagar.abhishek@...il.com>,
Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] ARM: ftrace: allow building without frame
pointers
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 01:03:05PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 23:28 +0530, Rabin Vincent wrote:
> > The easiest option to have a more obvious message than a linker error
> > would be to add something like this in entry-common.S:
> >
> > #if (__GNUC__ < 4 || (__GNUC__ == 4 && __GNUC_MINOR__ < 4)) \
> > && !defined(OLD_MCOUNT)
> > #warning Ftrace on GCC < 4.4 requires frame pointers
> > #endif
> >
> > Messages like this are also present in other places in ARM (for example
> > arch/arm/kernel/unwind.c), so this wouldn't be this first.
> >
> > Note that the above message would help in all cases except the one where
> > someone builds the kernel with !fp and GCC 4.4+, and then builds a
> > module with an older GCC. That would still be only a linker error.
>
> I was going to recommend the #if above. But shouldn't it be a #error
> instead of a #warning?
Yes, I'll make it a #error.
(I had it at #warning in case some one had a custom compiler that had
the new mcount patch backported, and chose to ignore the warning. But
it's probably better to leave it at #error and see if someone actually
complains about it, rather than have someone miss the message with it as
a #warning.)
Rabin
--
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