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: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 12:13:38 +0100 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org, Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org> Subject: [PATCH 3.18 005/134] mfd: twl-core: Fix section annotations on {,un}protect_pm_master 3.18-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ [ Upstream commit 8838555089f0345b87f4277fe5a8dd647dc65589 ] When building the kernel with Clang, the following section mismatch warning appears: WARNING: vmlinux.o(.text+0x3d84a3b): Section mismatch in reference from the function twl_probe() to the function .init.text:unprotect_pm_master() The function twl_probe() references the function __init unprotect_pm_master(). This is often because twl_probe lacks a __init annotation or the annotation of unprotect_pm_master is wrong. Remove the __init annotation on the *protect_pm_master functions so there is no more mismatch. Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org> --- drivers/mfd/twl-core.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c b/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c index db11b4f406116..2608c1d865857 100644 --- a/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c +++ b/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c @@ -983,7 +983,7 @@ add_children(struct twl4030_platform_data *pdata, unsigned irq_base, * letting it generate the right frequencies for USB, MADC, and * other purposes. */ -static inline int __init protect_pm_master(void) +static inline int protect_pm_master(void) { int e = 0; @@ -992,7 +992,7 @@ static inline int __init protect_pm_master(void) return e; } -static inline int __init unprotect_pm_master(void) +static inline int unprotect_pm_master(void) { int e = 0; -- 2.19.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists