Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:21:37 -0800 | From | Zachary Amsden <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Fix vmi time header bug |
| |
Andrew Morton wrote: > Really truly? I think we have a _lot_ of declarations which omit the section > qualifier altogether. How come they don't all break too? >
According to the report I have. Perhaps a bogus section qualifier does more damage than an omitted one. I'll get gcc / linker version, but this could be a combination of user error, a strange toolchain, and perhaps a real bug somewhere.
> (ARM (at least) in fact does require the section tagging on the declaration as > well as the definition, but we've thus far only fixed that in a couple of places > which were causing breakage). >
Yes, I was surprised by this as well, and I'm still skeptical about this being the real cause. Still, this reportedly fixed the problem, and is certainly not a bad thing.
Zach - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |