Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Subject | Re: 2.6.24-git7: section mismatches woes | Date | Sat, 2 Feb 2008 23:47:29 +0100 |
| |
On Saturday, 2 of February 2008, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 10:32:52PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Wednesday, 30 of January 2008, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 07:50:43PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I get these messages, the majority of which seem to be false-positives: > > > ... > > > > modpost: Found 35 section mismatch(es). > > > > To see additional details select "Enable full Section mismatch analysis" > > > > in the Kernel Hacking menu (CONFIG_SECTION_MISMATCH). > > > Looking in to these atm. > > > > > > > > > > > and if I compile the kernel with CONFIG_SECTION_MISMATCH, it breaks resuming > > > > from RAM. > > > > > > The only functional difference when you enable CONFIG_SECTION_MISMATCH is the > > > addition of the -fno-inline-functions-called-once to CFLAGS. > > > So we have some code somewhere that breaks if it is not inlined by gcc. > > > > > > It would be nice to sort out where. > > > If you have a rough idea where to look > > > > No, I don't. > > > > It looks like there's somewhere in arch/x86, since I ruled out kernel/power and > > drivers/acpi already. > > Hi Rafael.
Hi,
> Do you plan to look closer into this or do you have an easy receipe so > I can test myself (on a x86 64 bit box)?
Well, I really don't know how to approach this. Do you have an x86-64 box with suspend to RAM working?
Rafael
| |