From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
To: Jacek Luczak <difrost.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: pgtable_32.h - prototype and section mismatch fixes
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 20:31:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080414183156.GA15287@uranus.ravnborg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48033E2C.2080504@gmail.com>
>
> GCC is ok, I mean it inlines paravirt_pagetable_setup_[start,done] even with
> CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y:
> $ objdump -t vmlinux.o | grep pagetable_setup_start
> 0000a418 g F .init.text 000000a1 native_pagetable_setup_start
>
> While running with CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMTCH=y it does not inline
> paravirt_pagetable_setup_start (_done is OK):
> $ objdump -t vmlinux.o | grep pagetable_setup_start
> 00017100 l F .text 0000000b paravirt_pagetable_setup_start
> 00009fb0 g F .init.text 00000089 native_pagetable_setup_start
>
> DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH probably generated mismatch with smpboot_setup_io_apic()
> (commit: 96c968742fa1e6d64f979464acf2fd90cdc117b3, already merged). I will check
> and if __init is really superfluous I will post delta patch to remove all those
> __init annotations.
>
> Similar situation might be found with unlock_ExtINT_logic()
> (arch/x86/kernel/io_apic_32.c), which I annotated with __init in one of previous
> patches, but here, this function IMO shouldn't be marked inline.
Hi Jacek.
Please consider following code snippet:
static void __init foo() {}
static void __init bar() { foo(); }
static void __init baz() { bar(); }
Browsing this code it makes perfect sense that when baz()
is annotated __init bar and suddenly foo() has same annotation.
There is no point in removing the __init annotation of bar()
just becasue we happen to know it will be inlined by gcc.
Removing the __init anotation is actually wrong - because
the __init annotation has a two-fold purpose.
It is used to locate this function in a section that
is later discarded.
But it is also used to document that this function
is only used in the early init of this driver/what-ever.
So using this function in non-__init code is wrong.
Therefore I recommend to keep the __init annotation
also for the inline functions - assuming these functions
are supposed to be used only in the early init as the annotation
says they are.
Sam
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-04-14 18:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-13 15:41 Jacek Luczak
2008-04-14 7:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-14 8:41 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-04-14 8:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-14 8:59 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-04-14 9:11 ` Jacek Luczak
2008-04-14 9:52 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-04-14 11:21 ` Jacek Luczak
2008-04-14 18:31 ` Sam Ravnborg [this message]
2008-04-14 8:59 ` Jacek Luczak
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080414183156.GA15287@uranus.ravnborg.org \
--to=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=difrost.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®