linux-next: build warnings after merge of the final tree

linux-next: build warnings after merge of the final tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1844 bytes --]

Hi all,

After merging the final tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
allnoconfig with CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y) produced these warnings:

WARNING: mm/built-in.o(.text+0x24324): Section mismatch in reference from the function memblock_find_in_range() to the function .init.text:memblock_find_base()
The function memblock_find_in_range() references
the function __init memblock_find_base().
This is often because memblock_find_in_range lacks a __init 
annotation or the annotation of memblock_find_base is wrong.

WARNING: mm/built-in.o(.text+0x24610): Section mismatch in reference from the function memblock_double_array() to the function .init.text:memblock_free()
The function memblock_double_array() references
the function __init memblock_free().
This is often because memblock_double_array lacks a __init 
annotation or the annotation of memblock_free is wrong.

WARNING: mm/built-in.o(.text+0x24670): Section mismatch in reference from the function memblock_double_array() to the function .init.text:memblock_find_base()
The function memblock_double_array() references
the function __init memblock_find_base().
This is often because memblock_double_array lacks a __init 
annotation or the annotation of memblock_find_base is wrong.

WARNING: vmlinux.o(.text+0x10264): Section mismatch in reference from the function setup_initial_memory_limit() to the function .init.text:memblock_set_current_limit()
The function setup_initial_memory_limit() references
the function __init memblock_set_current_limit().
This is often because setup_initial_memory_limit lacks a __init 
annotation or the annotation of memblock_set_current_limit is wrong.

Introduced by the memblock series in the tip tree.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the final tree

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Mon, 2010-08-02 at 14:10 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> After merging the final tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> allnoconfig with CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y) produced these warnings:

 .../...

> Introduced by the memblock series in the tip tree.

Ok, so those are my fault but none are deadly. I'll do a fixup patch on
top of this.

Cheers,
Ben.

Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the final tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 322 bytes --]

Hi Ben,

On Mon, 02 Aug 2010 18:03:50 +1000 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
>
> Ok, so those are my fault but none are deadly. I'll do a fixup patch on
> top of this.

OK, thanks.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

linux-next: build warnings after merge of the final tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1476 bytes --]

Hi all,

After merging the final tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allyesconfig)
produced these warnings:

In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/asm-offsets.h:1:0,
                 from kernel/trace/trace_syscalls.c:9:
include/generated/asm-offsets.h:15:0: warning: "NMI_MASK" redefined [enabled by default]
include/linux/hardirq.h:56:0: note: this is the location of the previous definition
include/generated/asm-offsets.h:128:0: warning: "CLONE_VM" redefined [enabled by default]
include/linux/sched.h:8:0: note: this is the location of the previous definition
include/generated/asm-offsets.h:129:0: warning: "CLONE_UNTRACED" redefined [enabled by default]
include/linux/sched.h:22:0: note: this is the location of the previous definition
include/generated/asm-offsets.h:165:0: warning: "NSEC_PER_SEC" redefined [enabled by default]
include/linux/time.h:40:0: note: this is the location of the previous definition
include/generated/asm-offsets.h:173:0: warning: "PGD_TABLE_SIZE" redefined [enabled by default]
arch/powerpc/include/asm/pgtable-ppc64-4k.h:17:0: note: this is the location of the previous definition

Maybe caused by commit d5e553d6e0a4 ("trace: Include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
in trace_syscalls.c") from the tip tree.  These warnings may have been
here for a while as it is hard to catch the new ones among the flood.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the final tree

[Steven Rostedt]

On Wed, 2011-12-14 at 18:15 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> Maybe caused by commit d5e553d6e0a4 ("trace: Include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
> in trace_syscalls.c") from the tip tree.  These warnings may have been
> here for a while as it is hard to catch the new ones among the flood.
> 

hpa,

Was this change only needed for x86? If so, could you put that into
asm/ftrace.h instead?

-- Steve

Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the final tree

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 12/14/2011 08:32 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-12-14 at 18:15 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> 
>> Maybe caused by commit d5e553d6e0a4 ("trace: Include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
>> in trace_syscalls.c") from the tip tree.  These warnings may have been
>> here for a while as it is hard to catch the new ones among the flood.
>>
> 
> hpa,
> 
> Was this change only needed for x86? If so, could you put that into
> asm/ftrace.h instead?
> 

Yes (on both accounts).  It was part of the syscall changes; I'll move
the include.

	-hpa


-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the final tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 752 bytes --]

Hi Peter,

On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 08:47:01 -0800 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>
> On 12/14/2011 08:32 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-12-14 at 18:15 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > 
> >> Maybe caused by commit d5e553d6e0a4 ("trace: Include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
> >> in trace_syscalls.c") from the tip tree.  These warnings may have been
> >> here for a while as it is hard to catch the new ones among the flood.
> >>
> > 
> > hpa,
> > 
> > Was this change only needed for x86? If so, could you put that into
> > asm/ftrace.h instead?
> > 
> 
> Yes (on both accounts).  It was part of the syscall changes; I'll move
> the include.

Ping?
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the final tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 942 bytes --]

Hi again,

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 16:33:04 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 08:47:01 -0800 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 12/14/2011 08:32 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2011-12-14 at 18:15 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > 
> > >> Maybe caused by commit d5e553d6e0a4 ("trace: Include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
> > >> in trace_syscalls.c") from the tip tree.  These warnings may have been
> > >> here for a while as it is hard to catch the new ones among the flood.
> > >>
> > > 
> > > hpa,
> > > 
> > > Was this change only needed for x86? If so, could you put that into
> > > asm/ftrace.h instead?
> > 
> > Yes (on both accounts).  It was part of the syscall changes; I'll move
> > the include.
> 
> Ping?

Can we please have this fixed ...
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the final tree

[hpanvin@gmail.com]

I thought it had been...?  Need to investigate (as baby permits...)

Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

>Hi again,
>
>On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 16:33:04 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
><sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 08:47:01 -0800 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
>wrote:
>> >
>> > On 12/14/2011 08:32 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> > > On Wed, 2011-12-14 at 18:15 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> > > 
>> > >> Maybe caused by commit d5e553d6e0a4 ("trace: Include
><asm/asm-offsets.h>
>> > >> in trace_syscalls.c") from the tip tree.  These warnings may
>have been
>> > >> here for a while as it is hard to catch the new ones among the
>flood.
>> > >>
>> > > 
>> > > hpa,
>> > > 
>> > > Was this change only needed for x86? If so, could you put that
>into
>> > > asm/ftrace.h instead?
>> > 
>> > Yes (on both accounts).  It was part of the syscall changes; I'll
>move
>> > the include.
>> 
>> Ping?
>
>Can we please have this fixed ...
>-- 
>Cheers,
>Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
>http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.