From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [BUG] next-20081216 - WARNING: at kernel/smp.c:333 smp_call_function_mask Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2008 14:33:54 +0100 Message-ID: <20081226133354.GC29265@elte.hu> References: <86802c440812190351q3118516aif664dd5869c21b2a@mail.gmail.com> <20081219134636.GA11772@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <494C0BF0.3080109@kernel.org> <20081223132127.GA5450@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <495153A4.5060201@kernel.org> <20081224163400.GA11562@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <49529CE1.4040005@kernel.org> <20081226091217.GA5100@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4954AC7B.3020603@kernel.org> <20081226102716.GA31450@uranus.ravnborg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:57881 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751614AbYLZNfM (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Dec 2008 08:35:12 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081226102716.GA31450@uranus.ravnborg.org> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Sam Ravnborg Cc: Yinghai Lu , David Howells , Kamalesh Babulal , Andrew Morton , Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML , mel@csn.ul.ie * Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 02:05:47AM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote: > > Kamalesh Babulal wrote: > > > * Yinghai Lu [2008-12-24 12:34:41]: > > > > > >> -- > > > > > > After the applying the patch, the kernel panic's with the same backtrace. The > > > box is running Fedora 5 on it. > > > > > > > please try... > > Ingo, do we need to switch to use #idef and inline function instead? > > I recall David Howells had a similar issue with the bootparamter patch set. > The workaround he used was to add a barrier(); call in the weak function > to avoid the inline. could we add some extra attribute to __weak that would have a similar effect? Something like __attribute__((noinline)), or something silly like __attribute__((deprecated)) - just to keep gcc from screwing up __weak functions? Perhaps adding a section attribute would have a similar effect? (putting weak definitions into an extra section is probably helpful anyway) Ingo