From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753359AbbCZWP7 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 26 Mar 2015 18:15:59 -0400
Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:58751 "EHLO
	mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752435AbbCZWP6 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 26 Mar 2015 18:15:58 -0400
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 15:15:57 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, Mathias Krause <minipli@googlemail.com>,
        Mason <slash.tmp@free.fr>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: String literals in __init functions
Message-Id: <20150326151557.61dfad84272aff10aaa4eba7@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <1427407120.15849.34.camel@perches.com>
References: <5512F6C6.1020304@free.fr>
	<1427306517.2717.0.camel@perches.com>
	<5513FE2F.3040306@free.fr>
	<1427386390.15849.13.camel@perches.com>
	<CA+rthh9Fb2q+O_wicc6eNcbo6SzwOVZed=tnThJLF-xuoQ-+Cw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1427392393.15849.16.camel@perches.com>
	<CA+rthh8irf+tTSbomivu=bgN-L1k99TQ-q6UYgmMRC1PNOG7qw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20150326144058.56ef6916b00ad38030296089@linux-foundation.org>
	<1427407120.15849.34.camel@perches.com>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.4.1 (GTK+ 2.24.23; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:58:40 -0700 Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:

> > I'd have thought that a function-wide
> > 	__attribute__((__string_section__(foo))
> > wouldn't be a ton of work to implement.
> 
> Maybe not.
> 
> Could some future version of gcc move string constants
> in a function to a specific section marked in a manner
> similar to what Andrew described above?

One thing which might complexicate this is

void foo()
{
	p("bar");
}

void  __attribute__((__string_section__(.init.rodata)) zot()
{
	p("bar");
}

It would be silly to create two instances of "bar".

Change it thusly:


#define __mark_str(str) \
	({ static const char var[] __attribute__((__section__(".init.string"))) = str; var; })

void foo()
{
	p("bar");
}

void zot()
{
	p(__mark_str("bar"));
}


and we indeed get two copies of "bar".

It would be nice not to do that, but I guess that losing this
optimization is a reasonable compromise.