From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] /dev/mem gcc weak function workaround
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 21:28:33 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080429.212833.192304794.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080430013108.GA18207@linux-os.sc.intel.com>
From: Venki Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 18:31:09 -0700
> Some flavors of gcc 4.1.0 and 4.1.1 seems to have trouble understanding
> weak function definitions. Calls to function from the same file where it is
> defined as weak _may_ get inlined, even when there is a non-weak definition of
> the function elsewhere. I tried using attribute 'noinline' which does not
> seem to help either.
>
> One workaround for this is to have weak functions defined in different
> file as below. Other possible way is to not use weak functions and go back
> to ifdef logic.
>
> There are few other usages in kernel that seem to depend on weak (and noinline)
> working correctly, which can also potentially break and needs such workarounds.
> Example -
> mach_reboot_fixups() in arch/x86/kernel/reboot.c is one such call which
> is getting inlined with a flavor of gcc 4.1.1.
>
> Signed-off-by: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
This sounds like a bug. And if gcc does multi-file compilation it
can in theory do the same mistake even if you move it to another
file.
We need something more bulletproof here.
Also, we have a macro for marking things weak "__weak" which should
be used here.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-04-30 4:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-30 1:31 Venki Pallipadi
2008-04-30 4:28 ` David Miller [this message]
2008-04-30 12:49 ` Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2008-04-30 20:15 ` Tom Rini
2008-05-01 21:56 ` huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem Adrian Bunk
2008-05-01 22:20 ` Andrew Morton
2008-05-01 22:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-05-01 22:33 ` Andrew Morton
2008-05-01 23:24 ` Tom Rini
2008-05-01 23:59 ` Andrew Morton
2008-05-02 0:21 ` Justin Mattock
2008-05-02 7:18 ` Vegard Nossum
2008-05-02 13:43 ` Theodore Tso
2008-05-02 8:10 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-05-02 9:09 ` Andi Kleen
2008-05-01 22:35 ` Venki Pallipadi
2008-05-01 22:42 ` Andrew Morton
2008-05-01 22:49 ` Jakub Jelinek
2008-05-01 23:21 ` Tom Rini
2008-05-01 23:30 ` Venki Pallipadi
2008-05-02 0:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-05-02 0:39 ` Suresh Siddha
2008-05-02 21:11 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-02 22:02 ` David Miller
2008-05-01 23:23 ` Tom Rini
2008-05-01 22:51 ` David Miller
2008-06-26 10:37 ` [2.6.26 patch] #error for gcc 4.1.{0,1} Adrian Bunk
2008-05-02 21:09 ` huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-02 21:19 ` Adrian Bunk
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=20080429.212833.192304794.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com \
/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®