On Wed, 21 May 2008 15:44:41 -0400
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 11:41 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > yup, gcc bug. Discussed recently on lkml, "Subject: Re: huge gcc
> > 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem". I don't think anything ended up happening
> >
On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 21:06 +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> It was discussed to add some run-time checks for this issue.
> But the examples given were a bit fluffy so I never integrated
> anything
> i kbuild to detect this.
>
> As this is only a bug for const weak functions they could be made
> non-
On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 11:41 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> yup, gcc bug. Discussed recently on lkml, "Subject: Re: huge gcc
> 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem". I don't think anything ended up happening
> about it though.
Hrm... do you think we should work around ? ie. move the stubs to a
separate .c
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 11:41:47AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 21 May 2008 13:56:25 -0400 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 16:44 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > > > so what
> > > > > about the patch below ?
> > > >
> > > >
On Wed, 21 May 2008 13:56:25 -0400 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 16:44 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > > so what
> > > > about the patch below ?
> > >
> > > I like it, but the compiler won't ;)
> > >
> > > > If you're ok, I'll re-send wi
On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 16:44 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > so what
> > > about the patch below ?
> >
> > I like it, but the compiler won't ;)
> >
> > > If you're ok, I'll re-send with appropriate sob
> > > & adapted powerpc part.
> >
> > Sure.
> >
> > > +void __init __attribute__((
> > so what
> > about the patch below ?
>
> I like it, but the compiler won't ;)
>
> > If you're ok, I'll re-send with appropriate sob
> > & adapted powerpc part.
>
> Sure.
>
> > +void __init __attribute__((weak) thread_info_cache_init(void)
>
> s/weak)/weak))/
Yeah, missing quilt ref :-)
I
On Thu, 2008-04-17 at 21:19 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:58:06 +1000 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > > > > otoh, if only one .c file will ever call this function then I think
> > > > > that
> > > > > all problems are solved by
> > > > >
> >
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 01:58:06PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> Well, looking there, I saw we already used weak symbols for that so what
> about the patch below ? If you're ok, I'll re-send with appropriate sob
> & adapted powerpc part.
>
This is definitely the cleanest way to do this f
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:58:06 +1000 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > > > otoh, if only one .c file will ever call this function then I think that
> > > > all problems are solved by
> > > >
> > > > a) moving the above ifdeffery into the .c file
> > > > b) adding a comment e
> > > otoh, if only one .c file will ever call this function then I think that
> > > all problems are solved by
> > >
> > > a) moving the above ifdeffery into the .c file
> > > b) adding a comment explaining which arch file must provide the override
> > > c) directly including that file from with
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 10:38:26 +1000 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > > +#ifndef thread_info_cache_init
> > > +#define thread_info_cache_init do { } while(0)
> > > +#endif
> >
> > This trick does cause a bit of a problem: it is undefined which arch header
> > file is to prov
> > +#ifndef thread_info_cache_init
> > +#define thread_info_cache_init do { } while(0)
> > +#endif
>
> This trick does cause a bit of a problem: it is undefined which arch header
> file is to provide the alternative definition of thread_info_cache_init.
I this case it's well defined: thread_
On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 13:22:56 +1000 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Some architecture need to maintain a kmem cache for thread info
> structures. (next patch adds that to powerpc to fix an alignment
> problem).
>
> There is no good arch callback to use to initialize that cache
Some architecture need to maintain a kmem cache for thread info
structures. (next patch adds that to powerpc to fix an alignment
problem).
There is no good arch callback to use to initialize that cache
that I can find, so this adds a new one and adds an empty macro
for when it's not implemented.
> +#ifndef thread_info_cache_init
> +#define thread_info_cache_init do { } while(0)
> +#endif
> +
Blah ! Missing a pair of () here. Ooops. I'll send a fixed patch.
Ben.
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/ma
Some architecture need to maintain a kmem cache for thread info
structures. (next patch adds that to powerpc to fix an alignment
problem).
There is no good arch callback to use to initialize that cache
that I can find, so this adds a new one and adds an empty macro
for when it's not implemented.
17 matches
Mail list logo
