On Sun, 7 Mar 2021 05:47:56 +0100
Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote:
> On 3/7/21 5:25 AM, Marek Behún wrote:
> > This is how Linux does this now, see Linux commit 339f29d91acf.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marek Behún <marek.be...@nic.cz>
> > ---
> > scripts/checkpatch.pl | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > index 755f4802a4..fd1e9c4d24 100755
> > --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > @@ -6065,7 +6065,7 @@ sub process {
> > my $old = substr($rawline, $-[1], $+[1] - $-[1]);
> > my $new = substr($old, 1, -1);
> > if (WARN("PREFER_SECTION",
> > - "__section($new) is preferred over
> > __attribute__((section($old)))\n" . $herecurr) &&
> > + "__section(\"$new\") is preferred over
> > __attribute__((section($old)))\n" . $herecurr) &&
> > $fix) {
> > $fixed[$fixlinenr] =~
> > s/\b__attribute__\s*\(\s*\(\s*_*section_*\s*\(\s*\Q$old\E\s*\)\s*\)\s*\)/__section($new)/;
> >
>
> Shouldn't some of the patches which are clearly fixes be sent as
> separate fixes, so they can be picked while the LTO support is being
> worked on ?
Yes, ideally it would be better, but:
this patch is connected to patch 6 of this series, and patch 6 needs to
be in this series because otherwise people trying to apply this series
would get an error.
The first 4 patches are also fixes for something else, but they
were discovered thanks to LTO and without them users will get
warnings/errors when trying to build for some boards.
Tom, should I send these patches separately? Also the first 3 patches
should maybe be applied via Stefan and Simon, via their trees...
Marek
