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  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 19 Apr 2019 18:47:51 +0900
From:   Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        x86@...nel.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 08/11] powerpc/prom_init: mark prom_getprop() and prom_getproplen() as __init

This prepares to move CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING from x86 to a common
place. We need to eliminate potential issues beforehand.

If it is enabled for powerpc, the following modpost warnings are
reported:

WARNING: vmlinux.o(.text.unlikely+0x20): Section mismatch in reference from the function .prom_getprop() to the function .init.text:.call_prom()
The function .prom_getprop() references
the function __init .call_prom().
This is often because .prom_getprop lacks a __init
annotation or the annotation of .call_prom is wrong.

WARNING: vmlinux.o(.text.unlikely+0x3c): Section mismatch in reference from the function .prom_getproplen() to the function .init.text:.call_prom()
The function .prom_getproplen() references
the function __init .call_prom().
This is often because .prom_getproplen lacks a __init
annotation or the annotation of .call_prom is wrong.

Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
---

Changes in v2:
  - split into a separate patch

 arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c
index f33ff4163a51..241fe6b7a8cc 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c
@@ -501,14 +501,14 @@ static int __init prom_next_node(phandle *nodep)
 	}
 }
 
-static inline int prom_getprop(phandle node, const char *pname,
-			       void *value, size_t valuelen)
+static inline int __init prom_getprop(phandle node, const char *pname,
+				      void *value, size_t valuelen)
 {
 	return call_prom("getprop", 4, 1, node, ADDR(pname),
 			 (u32)(unsigned long) value, (u32) valuelen);
 }
 
-static inline int prom_getproplen(phandle node, const char *pname)
+static inline int __init prom_getproplen(phandle node, const char *pname)
 {
 	return call_prom("getproplen", 2, 1, node, ADDR(pname));
 }
-- 
2.17.1

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ