[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120605183539.GA32472@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 14:35:39 -0400
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86,nmi: Fix section mismatch warnings on 32-bit
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 04:42:20PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 05.06.12 at 16:47, Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 09:12:13AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> So before applying a change like this, I'd really like to understand
> >> the issue itself. Could you simply attach the nmi_selftest.o file
> >> that you get without your patch here (and indicate which
> >> upstream version or revision the corresponding source file was
> >> from, to be able to re-construct what the compiler actually did)?
> >
> > I could but it might be easier for you to re-create it on your end.
> > Using gcc-4.4.4 on an x86_64 box and v3.5-rc1, I just set
> > CONFIG_DEBUG_NMI_SELFTEST to 'y' and compile with
> >
> > make ARCH=i386 O=out/i686
> >
> > and it easily reproduces for me.
>
> I don't think I have a plain 4.4.4 around anywhere, nor is it clear
> whether you used a plain one (and how it was configured). For
> tricky, highly version dependent things like this (where a compiler
> bug also can't be excluded), having the _exact_ object file the
> problem was seen with would be much easier than trying to hunt
> down a compiler version that I can reproduce this with.
I didn't think it would be compiler dependent as I do not know what
compiler the reporter was using. I used a RHEL-6 4.4.4 compiler (which
you probably don't have :^) ).
I attached a gzip'd copy of my nmi_selftest.o file for your debugging.
Cheers,
Don
Download attachment "nmi_selftest.o.gz" of type "application/x-gzip" (16267 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists