lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Aug]   [20]   [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 19.08.12 at 17:01, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:
> 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.

__exit, on x86 and perhaps other arches, causes the code
to be discarded at runtime only.

>> >+#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?

No - see above. Using .discard.* enforces the discarding at link
time.

Jan



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-08-20 13:41    [W:0.130 / U:1.300 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site