All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christian Engelmayer <cengelma@gmx.at>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Kevin Hao <haokexin@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/sysdev: Fix a mpic section mismatch for MPC85xx
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 22:14:28 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140128221428.4c5b49f2@spike> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131220000041.05da4209@spike>

On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 00:00:41 +0100, Christian Engelmayer <cengelma@gmx.at> wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 11:10:53 +1100 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> > On Sun, 2013-12-15 at 19:38 +0100, Christian Engelmayer wrote:
> > > Moved arch/powerpc/sysdev/mpic.c : smp_mpic_probe() out of the __init section.
> > > It is referenced by arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/smp.c : smp_85xx_setup_cpu().
> > 
> > I don't like this. The reference is not actually going to call into the
> > code at all and as such is not an error, it's just a pointer comparison.
> 
> That's correct. I proposed it that way because on first sight I was concerned
> that there is an address of an __init function assigned to a function pointer
> within a non __initdata struct at all that can be compared against. However,
> further usage of smp_ops->probe is currently safe of course and *_ops symbols
> within .data are whitelisted to refer to init sections.
> 
> > If there is no way to silence the warning, then I'd suggest to use a
> > global flag, something like mpc85xx_pic_type and test that instead
> > of comparing the pointers.
> 
> I've seen that there is currently a patch proposed against
> 
>    commit dc2c9c52b604f51b1416ed87ff54a1c77a1a8b5b
>    powerpc/85xx: Set up doorbells even with no mpic
> 
> that introduced the section causing the warning:
> 
>    http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/289214/
>    powerpc/85xx: don't init the mpic ipi for the SoC which has doorbell support
> 
> This patch also removes the affected pointer comparison and if accepted would
> thus also silence this warning.

Kevin's change (powerpc/85xx: don't init the mpic ipi for the SoC which has
doorbell support) entered mainline by merge 1b17366d. I verified that the
issue is thereby solved and my patch obsolete.

   http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/301402/

Regards,
Christian

      reply	other threads:[~2014-01-28 21:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-12-15 18:38 [PATCH] powerpc/sysdev: Fix a mpic section mismatch for MPC85xx Christian Engelmayer
2013-12-16  0:10 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2013-12-19 23:00   ` Christian Engelmayer
2014-01-28 21:14     ` Christian Engelmayer [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20140128221428.4c5b49f2@spike \
    --to=cengelma@gmx.at \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=haokexin@gmail.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=scottwood@freescale.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.