linux-next: build warning after merge of the final tree (tip tree related)

linux-next: build warning after merge of the final tree (tip tree related)

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 750 bytes --]

Hi all,

After merging the final tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
allnoconfig) produced this warning:

WARNING: mm/built-in.o(.text+0x25ab8): Section mismatch in reference from the function memblock_find_base() to the function .init.text:memblock_find_region()
The function memblock_find_base() references
the function __init memblock_find_region().
This is often because memblock_find_base lacks a __init 
annotation or the annotation of memblock_find_region is wrong.

Introduced by commit 3661ca66a42e306aaf53246fb75aec1ea01be0f0 ("memblock:
Fix section mismatch warnings").

Sorry, I seem to have missed this before.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the final tree (tip tree related)

[Yinghai Lu]

On 10/10/2010 10:04 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> After merging the final tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> allnoconfig) produced this warning:
> 
> WARNING: mm/built-in.o(.text+0x25ab8): Section mismatch in reference from the function memblock_find_base() to the function .init.text:memblock_find_region()
> The function memblock_find_base() references
> the function __init memblock_find_region().
> This is often because memblock_find_base lacks a __init 
> annotation or the annotation of memblock_find_region is wrong.
> 
> Introduced by commit 3661ca66a42e306aaf53246fb75aec1ea01be0f0 ("memblock:
> Fix section mismatch warnings").
> 
please check

[PATCH] x86: Fix section mismatch with memblock_find_region

Stephen found

WARNING: mm/built-in.o(.text+0x25ab8): Section mismatch in reference from the function memblock_find_base() to the function .init.text:memblock_find_region()
The function memblock_find_base() references
the function __init memblock_find_region().
This is often because memblock_find_base lacks a __init 
annotation or the annotation of memblock_find_region is wrong.

make all functions in memblock.c without __init to carry __init_memblock.

Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>

---
 mm/memblock.c |    4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Index: linux-2.6/mm/memblock.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/mm/memblock.c
+++ linux-2.6/mm/memblock.c
@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ long __init_memblock memblock_overlaps_r
  * are top-down.
  */
 
-static phys_addr_t __init memblock_find_region(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end,
+static phys_addr_t __init_memblock memblock_find_region(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end,
 					  phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align)
 {
 	phys_addr_t base, res_base;
@@ -653,7 +653,7 @@ void __init memblock_enforce_memory_limi
 	}
 }
 
-static int memblock_search(struct memblock_type *type, phys_addr_t addr)
+static int __init_memblock memblock_search(struct memblock_type *type, phys_addr_t addr)
 {
 	unsigned int left = 0, right = type->cnt;
 

Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the final tree (tip tree related)

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 10/11/2010 10:09 AM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> 
> make all functions in memblock.c without __init to carry __init_memblock.
> 
>  
> -static phys_addr_t __init memblock_find_region(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end,
> +static phys_addr_t __init_memblock memblock_find_region(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end,
>  					  phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align)
>  
> -static int memblock_search(struct memblock_type *type, phys_addr_t addr)
> +static int __init_memblock memblock_search(struct memblock_type *type, phys_addr_t addr)
>  

Your patch description doesn't match what your patch does.  Please write
a correct description.

	-hpa

Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the final tree (tip tree related)

[Yinghai Lu]

On 10/11/2010 12:00 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 10/11/2010 10:09 AM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>
>> make all functions in memblock.c without __init to carry __init_memblock.
>>
>>  
>> -static phys_addr_t __init memblock_find_region(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end,
>> +static phys_addr_t __init_memblock memblock_find_region(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end,
>>  					  phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align)
>>  
>> -static int memblock_search(struct memblock_type *type, phys_addr_t addr)
>> +static int __init_memblock memblock_search(struct memblock_type *type, phys_addr_t addr)
>>  
> 
> Your patch description doesn't match what your patch does.  Please write
> a correct description.

please check

[PATCH -v2] x86: Fix section mismatch with memblock_find_region()

Stephen found

WARNING: mm/built-in.o(.text+0x25ab8): Section mismatch in reference from the function memblock_find_base() to the function .init.text:memblock_find_region()
The function memblock_find_base() references
the function __init memblock_find_region().
This is often because memblock_find_base lacks a __init 
annotation or the annotation of memblock_find_region is wrong.

So let memblock_find_region() to use __init_memblock insteaf of __init directly.

Also make left function that doesn't have __init* to carry  __init_memblock.

Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>

---
 mm/memblock.c |    4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Index: linux-2.6/mm/memblock.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/mm/memblock.c
+++ linux-2.6/mm/memblock.c
@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ long __init_memblock memblock_overlaps_r
  * are top-down.
  */
 
-static phys_addr_t __init memblock_find_region(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end,
+static phys_addr_t __init_memblock memblock_find_region(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end,
 					  phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align)
 {
 	phys_addr_t base, res_base;
@@ -653,7 +653,7 @@ void __init memblock_enforce_memory_limi
 	}
 }
 
-static int memblock_search(struct memblock_type *type, phys_addr_t addr)
+static int __init_memblock memblock_search(struct memblock_type *type, phys_addr_t addr)
 {
 	unsigned int left = 0, right = type->cnt;
 

[tip:core/memblock] memblock: Annotate memblock functions with __init_memblock

[tip-bot for Yinghai Lu]

Commit-ID:  cd79481d27b9f90aad80c9b972292c42c25bbf8e
Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/cd79481d27b9f90aad80c9b972292c42c25bbf8e
Author:     Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
AuthorDate: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 12:34:09 -0700
Committer:  H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
CommitDate: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 16:00:52 -0700

memblock: Annotate memblock functions with __init_memblock

Stephen found

WARNING: mm/built-in.o(.text+0x25ab8): Section mismatch in reference from the function memblock_find_base() to the function .init.text:memblock_find_region()
The function memblock_find_base() references
the function __init memblock_find_region().
This is often because memblock_find_base lacks a __init
annotation or the annotation of memblock_find_region is wrong.

So let memblock_find_region() to use __init_memblock instead of __init
directly.

Also fix one function that did not have __init* to be __init_memblock.

Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
LKML-Reference: <4CB366B1.40405@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
---
 mm/memblock.c |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c
index ae8b06c..400dc62 100644
--- a/mm/memblock.c
+++ b/mm/memblock.c
@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ long __init_memblock memblock_overlaps_region(struct memblock_type *type, phys_a
  * are top-down.
  */
 
-static phys_addr_t __init memblock_find_region(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end,
+static phys_addr_t __init_memblock memblock_find_region(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end,
 					  phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align)
 {
 	phys_addr_t base, res_base;
@@ -653,7 +653,7 @@ void __init memblock_enforce_memory_limit(phys_addr_t memory_limit)
 	}
 }
 
-static int memblock_search(struct memblock_type *type, phys_addr_t addr)
+static int __init_memblock memblock_search(struct memblock_type *type, phys_addr_t addr)
 {
 	unsigned int left = 0, right = type->cnt;