From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2022 19:39:48 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] profile: setup_profiling_timer() is moslty not implemented Message-Id: <20220725123948.f16674b10022404814161d4a@linux-foundation.org> List-Id: References: <20220721195509.418205-1-ben-linux@fluff.org> In-Reply-To: <20220721195509.418205-1-ben-linux@fluff.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Ben Dooks Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, openrisc@lists.librecores.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, linux-csky@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 20:55:09 +0100 Ben Dooks wrote: > The setup_profiling_timer() is mostly un-implemented by many > architectures. In many places it isn't guarded by CONFIG_PROFILE > which is needed for it to be used. Make it a weak symbol in > kernel/profile.c and remove the 'return -EINVAL' implementations > from the kenrel. > > There are a couple of architectures which do return 0 from > the setup_profiling_timer() function but they don't seem to > do anything else with it. To keep the /proc compatibility for > now, leave these for a future update or removal. > > On ARM, this fixes the following sparse warning: > arch/arm/kernel/smp.c:793:5: warning: symbol 'setup_profiling_timer' was not declared. Should it be static? I'll grab this. We have had some problems with weak functions lately. See https://lore.kernel.org/all/87ee0q7b92.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org/T/#u Hopefully that was a rare corner case.