>>> Andi Kleen <a...@firstfloor.org> 08/19/12 5:02 AM >>> >-extern const unsigned long kallsyms_addresses[] __attribute__((weak)); >-extern const u8 kallsyms_names[] __attribute__((weak)); >+extern __visible const unsigned long kallsyms_addresses[] >__attribute__((weak)); >+extern __visible const u8 kallsyms_names[] __attribute__((weak)); Shouldn't we minimally aim at consistency here: - all attributes in a one place (I personally prefer the placement between type and name, for compatibility with other compilers, but there are rare cases - iirc not on declarations though - where gcc doesn't allow this) - not using open coded __attribute__(()) when a definition (here: __weak) is available, or alternatively open coding all of them (__attribute__((weak, ...)))?
Jan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
