lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Aug]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 55/74] lto, workaround: Add workaround for initcall reordering
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 09:46:04AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> 08/19/12 5:05 AM >>>
> >Work around a LTO gcc problem: when there is no reference to a variable
> >in a module it will be moved to the end of the program. This causes
> >reordering of initcalls which the kernel does not like.
> >Add a dummy reference function to avoid this. The function is
> >deleted by the linker.
>
> This is not even true on x86, not to speak of generally.

Why is it not true ?

__initcall is only defined for !MODULE and there __exit discards.

>
> >+#ifdef CONFIG_LTO
> >+/* Work around a LTO gcc problem: when there is no reference to a variable
> >+ * in a module it will be moved to the end of the program. This causes
> >+ * reordering of initcalls which the kernel does not like.
> >+ * Add a dummy reference function to avoid this. The function is
> >+ * deleted by the linker.
> >+ */
> >+#define LTO_REFERENCE_INITCALL(x) \
> >+ ; /* yes this is needed */ \
> >+ static __used __exit void *reference_##x(void) \
>
> Why not put it into e.g. section .discard.text? That could be expected to be
> discarded by the linker without being arch dependent, as long as all arches
> use DISCARDS in their linker script.


That's what __exit does, doesn't it?

-Andi

--
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-08-19 17:41    [W:0.080 / U:5.420 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site