Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:34:14 -0800 | From | Stephen Boyd <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] staging: ram_console: Fix section mismatches |
| |
On 03/08/12 10:23, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 10:12:07AM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote: >> On 03/08/12 09:56, Greg KH wrote: >>> On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 01:08:04AM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote: >>>> WARNING: vmlinux.o(.text+0x25d5fc): Section mismatch in reference >>>> from the function ram_console_driver_probe() to the function >>>> .init.text:ram_console_init() >>>> The function ram_console_driver_probe() references >>>> the function __init ram_console_init(). >>>> This is often because ram_console_driver_probe lacks a __init >>>> annotation or the annotation of ram_console_init is wrong. >>>> >>>> Mark ram_console_driver_probe() as __devinit because it's a probe >>>> function and propagate the __devinit markings to the __init >>>> functions the probe calls. >>> What .config configuration causes this to happen? I don't see this here >>> in my builds, what am I doing wrong? >>> >> # >> # Android >> # >> CONFIG_ANDROID=y >> # CONFIG_ANDROID_BINDER_IPC is not set >> # CONFIG_ASHMEM is not set >> # CONFIG_ANDROID_LOGGER is not set >> CONFIG_ANDROID_RAM_CONSOLE=y >> # CONFIG_ANDROID_RAM_CONSOLE_ERROR_CORRECTION is not set >> # CONFIG_ANDROID_TIMED_OUTPUT is not set >> # CONFIG_ANDROID_LOW_MEMORY_KILLER is not set >> # CONFIG_ANDROID_SWITCH is not set >> # CONFIG_PHONE is not set >> >> >> Perhaps you're missing this patch if you're on an ARM compiler? >> >> 6e2e340 (ARM: 7324/1: modpost: Fix section warnings for ARM for many >> compilers, 2012-02-14) > Nope, I'm building this on x86-64 which warns on this type of thing all > the time. > > My .config looks like this: > > # > # Android > # > CONFIG_ANDROID=y > CONFIG_ANDROID_BINDER_IPC=y > CONFIG_ASHMEM=y > CONFIG_ANDROID_LOGGER=m > CONFIG_ANDROID_PERSISTENT_RAM=y > CONFIG_ANDROID_RAM_CONSOLE=y > CONFIG_ANDROID_TIMED_OUTPUT=y > # CONFIG_ANDROID_TIMED_GPIO is not set > CONFIG_ANDROID_LOW_MEMORY_KILLER=y > CONFIG_ANDROID_SWITCH=m > CONFIG_ANDROID_SWITCH_GPIO=m > CONFIG_ANDROID_INTF_ALARM=y > CONFIG_ANDROID_INTF_ALARM_DEV=y > CONFIG_ANDROID_ALARM_OLDDRV_COMPAT=y > > And I can't duplicate this at all. Could the recent fixes that John > sent me be the reason? Or something else? >
This patch is based on your staging-next branch at c5ee121 (staging: android: ram_console: drop verbose ram_console support, 2012-03-07). It applied that ARM patch on top because I'm compiling with ARM.
It looks like aggressive inlining by the x86 compiler hides this from you. I see that if I mark ram_console_init() as noinline
diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/ram_console.c b/drivers/staging/android/ram_console.c index 73215e2..c468fa2 100644 --- a/drivers/staging/android/ram_console.c +++ b/drivers/staging/android/ram_console.c @@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ ram_console_save_old(struct ram_console_buffer *buffer, char *dest) &buffer->data[0], buffer->start); } -static int __init ram_console_init(struct ram_console_buffer *buffer, +static noinline int __init ram_console_init(struct ram_console_buffer *buffer, size_t buffer_size, char *old_buf) { #ifdef CONFIG_ANDROID_RAM_CONSOLE_ERROR_CORRECTION
then I see the section mismatch when compiling on x86. Otherwise I don't see anything. Is there a bug in the section mismatch detection with respect to compiler inlining?
-- Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
| |