Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Fri, 8 Jun 2012 16:51:38 -0400 | | From | Don Zickus <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86,nmi: Fix section mismatch warnings on 32-bit |
| |
On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 08:48:00AM -0400, Don Zickus wrote: > On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 03:43:25PM +0800, Li Zhong wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 10:03 -0400, Don Zickus wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 12:14:33PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > I didn't think it would be compiler dependent as I do not know what > > > > > compiler the reporter was using. I used a RHEL-6 4.4.4 compiler (which > > > > > you probably don't have :^) ). > > > > > > > > Indeed, somehow I failed to see the obvious - it's commit > > > > 72b3fb24713755cf9740b403e95aa67ceedf3509 that causes > > > > these problems. Instantiating static data like this just doesn't > > > > play with any of the pointers passed being into .init.*. > > > > > > > > I'd suggest either open coding register_nmi_handler() (with > > > > the static data put into __initdata), or further abstracting it > > > > by allowing an optional fifth argument (specifying the section > > > > annotation if needed). > > > > > > Ah. Thanks for figuring that out!! I will post a patch opencoding it. > > > > > > > Hi Don, > > > > How about the following patch, adding an optional fifth argument as Jan > > mentioned? We don't need change other users of register_nmi_handler(). > > Ah, ok. I forgot about the variable args syntax. That works too. I give > a quick test.
Apparently I was too slow. Ingo committed my other patch. I can ask him to revert it and use your smaller/cleaner patch instead? Or is it big deal to keep the other one?
Cheers, Don
|  |