[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK7LNARBpsFzYfCLwHEzjYNWnM9BLX3tEzvmPKjiKWzkU-yjrg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2022 01:35:48 +0900
From: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc: Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] modpost: shorten warning messages in report_sec_mismatch()
On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 3:13 AM Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2022 at 2:41 AM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Each section mismatch results in long warning messages. Too much.
>
> :(
>
> Yes; they are too verbose. That said, I have found the
> recommendations about annotations for function attributes handy in the
> past and would be sad to see them go. They remind me of "note"
> diagnostics from the compiler that add additional context to
> "warning"/"error" diagnostics on what the recommended next steps are
> for fixing them.
>
> Is there a "happy middle ground" here?
I do not know.
modpost became painfully ugly.
Moreover, the current hint is not necessarily precise.
("lacks a __initdata" in the following)
[sample code]
int dummy __initdata;
void set_dummy(void) { dummy = 1; }
[warning]
WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text+0x194412): Section mismatch in
reference from the function set_dummy() to the variable
.init.data:dummy
The function set_dummy() references
the variable __initdata dummy.
This is often because set_dummy lacks a __initdata
annotation or the annotation of dummy is wrong.
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
Powered by blists - more mailing lists