netdev - Re: Section conflict compile failures in net

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]

Message-Id: <20110531.192514.33793304.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 31 May 2011 19:25:14 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com
Cc:	mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Section conflict compile failures in net

From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 10:42:50 +0900

> It's really, as has been said, a compiler problem: the compiler is
> confused about the read only sections.  However, 4.2 is a pretty common
> compiler (especially for non-x86), so if the compiler can't do the read
> only section tracking, just not using the __devinitconst designation
> globally seems to be the best thing, just change it to __devinitdata
> instead.

I think I'm just going to do a full revert then.

You guys work out how to arrive at a solution that solves the problem
he was originally trying to solve, yet doesn't break this gcc-4.2
case.

Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html