From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the final tree
 (driver-core tree related)
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 06:28:42 -0700
Message-ID: <20100914132842.GC499@kroah.com>
References: <20100907115426.fc0c3e13.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
 <201009132126.14115.trenn@suse.de>
 <20100913205712.GB18766@kroah.com>
 <201009140922.51566.trenn@suse.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <201009140922.51566.trenn@suse.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>, Jason Baron <jbaron@redhat.com>, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 09:22:51AM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> On Monday 13 September 2010 22:57:12 Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 09:26:13PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> > > On Monday 13 September 2010 17:51:55 Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 6 Sep 2010 19:34:04 -0700 Greg KH wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 11:54:26AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Greg,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > After merging the final tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> > > > > > allnoconfig) produced this warning:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > kernel/params.c: In function 'parse_args':
> > > > > > kernel/params.c:233: warning: the frame size of 1032 bytes is larger than 1024 bytes
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Introduced by commit 32e6407e9361cd1aac39ff6b744cad48d1802a08 ("Dynamic
> > > > > > Debug: Introduce global fake module param module.ddebug") which added a
> > > > > > 1024 byte array to the stack ...
> > > > > 
> > > > > Wierd, why didn't this show up yesterday?  The patch was in that tree
> > > > > then, right?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thomas, care to fix this up?
> > > >  
> > > > ping.  Is Thomas around??
> > > Yep, sorry for not responding.
> > > 
> > > I tried to reproduce this on ppc64, but above file compiled without
> > > warning with dynamic debug set. Thus I thought this still came from the
> > > old patch.
> > > 
> > > I have another solution for that, please drop above patch.
> > > Jason pointed out that kernel boot params for compiled-in modules are
> > > not recognized correctly. I fiddled with that for quite some time last week...
> > > 
> > > I should be able to send something tomorrow.
> > > I will include lkml as it touches several files, would be great if Greg
> > > can pick them up again if feedback is positive.
> > 
> > Ok, which exact patch do you want me to drop, the "Introduce global fake
> > module param..." one?
> Yes, please.

Now dropped.

thanks,

greg k-h