lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [May]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [Patch 1/4] Allow arch-specific cleanup before breakpoint unregistration
From
Date
On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 10:54 +0100, David Howells wrote:
> K.Prasad <prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > > My understanding is weak function definitions must appear in a different C
> > > file than their call sites to work on some toolchains.
> > >
> >
> > Atleast, there are quite a few precedents inside the Linux kernel for
> > __weak functions being invoked from the file in which they are defined
> > (arch_hwblk_init, arch_enable_nonboot_cpus_begin and hw_perf_disable to
> > name a few).
> > Moreover the online GCC docs haven't any such constraints mentioned.
>
> I've seen problems in this area. gcc sometimes inlines a weak function that's
> in the same file as the call point.

See the functions in kernel/softirq.c for example, and commits 43a256322
and b2e2fe996 - though unhelpfully they don't mention the gcc version. A
bit of googling suggests it was probably "gcc version 4.1.1 20060525
(Red Hat 4.1.1-1)" in that case.

But the example of hw_perf_enable() (which is weak in the same unit),
suggests maybe this isn't a bug many people are hitting in practice
anymore.

Having said that the #define foo foo pattern is reasonably neat and
avoids the problem altogether, see eg. arch_setup_msi_irqs.

cheers
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-05-26 17:17    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans