From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sam Ravnborg Subject: Re: [PATCH] of/pdt: fix section mismatch warning Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2011 00:07:30 +0100 Message-ID: <20111227230730.GA29537@merkur.ravnborg.org> References: <20111227220408.GA18932@merkur.ravnborg.org> <20111227.171307.1727824866350984198.davem@davemloft.net> <20111227222658.GA19202@merkur.ravnborg.org> <20111227.172921.750063350996279524.davem@davemloft.net> <4EFA4C8F.5080901@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4EFA4C8F.5080901-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Sender: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org To: Rob Herring Cc: devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, David Miller List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 04:54:07PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > On 12/27/2011 04:29 PM, David Miller wrote: > > From: Sam Ravnborg > > Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 23:26:58 +0100 > > > >> We have two implementations of kernel_tree_alloc() - one in fdt.c and > >> another in pdt.c. > >> > >> $ grep kernel_tree_alloc * > >> fdt.c:static void *kernel_tree_alloc(u64 size, u64 align) > >> fdt.c: __unflatten_device_tree(device_tree, mynodes, &kernel_tree_alloc); > >> pdt.c:static void * __init kernel_tree_alloc(u64 size, u64 align) > >> pdt.c: of_alias_scan(kernel_tree_alloc); > >> > >> The version in fdt.c is using kzalloc() whereas the version in pdt.c > >> uses prom_early_alloc(). > >> > >> And of_fdt_unflatten_tree() uses the version in fdt.c - so the patch is OK. > >> > >> It is confusing that they have the same name - but I did nto fix that. > >> And I forgot about this detail when I wrote the changelog. > > > > Ok, I hadn't realized this, thanks for explaining. > > > > I think Grant should apply your patch then: > > > > Acked-by: David S. Miller > > _______________________________________________ > > I've applied it for 3.3 unless you think it needs to go into 3.2. It is only silencing a warning so 3.3 is the right choice. Sam