* MODPOST section mismatches
@ 2008-02-21 21:33 Steve Heflin
2008-02-22 16:12 ` Steve Heflin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Steve Heflin @ 2008-02-21 21:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-embedded
while building vmlinux.o the MODPOST warns about 8 section mismatches.
WARNING: modpost: Found 8 section mismatch(es).
To see full details build your kernel with:
'make CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y'
After modifying the make launch to include the recommended option
shown above, I see that the section mismatch warning is due to data
structures containing the address of initialization modules which
have the __init attribute. Since the memory model is FLAT, is this a problem?
thanks,
Steve
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: MODPOST section mismatches
2008-02-21 21:33 MODPOST section mismatches Steve Heflin
@ 2008-02-22 16:12 ` Steve Heflin
2008-02-22 20:52 ` Josh Boyer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Steve Heflin @ 2008-02-22 16:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-embedded
To reproduce the problem and see the details on section mismatches:
make ARCH=powerpc sequoia_defconfig
make ARCH=powerpc CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y
At 04:33 PM 2/21/2008, Steve Heflin wrote:
>while building vmlinux.o the MODPOST warns about 8 section mismatches.
>WARNING: modpost: Found 8 section mismatch(es).
>To see full details build your kernel with:
>'make CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y'
>
>After modifying the make launch to include the recommended option
>shown above, I see that the section mismatch warning is due to data
>structures containing the address of initialization modules which
>have the __init attribute. Since the memory model is FLAT, is this a problem?
>
>thanks,
>Steve
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Linuxppc-embedded mailing list
>Linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
>https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: MODPOST section mismatches
2008-02-22 16:12 ` Steve Heflin
@ 2008-02-22 20:52 ` Josh Boyer
2008-02-22 22:26 ` Steve Heflin
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Josh Boyer @ 2008-02-22 20:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steve Heflin; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 11:12:47 -0500
Steve Heflin <sheflin@newagemicro.com> wrote:
> To reproduce the problem and see the details on section mismatches:
>
> make ARCH=powerpc sequoia_defconfig
>
> make ARCH=powerpc CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y
All of those warnings are in drivers or common code. And yes, they
should eventually all be fixed.
> >After modifying the make launch to include the recommended option
> >shown above, I see that the section mismatch warning is due to data
> >structures containing the address of initialization modules which
> >have the __init attribute. Since the memory model is FLAT, is this a problem?
What do you mean by "the memory model is FLAT"?
josh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: MODPOST section mismatches
2008-02-22 20:52 ` Josh Boyer
@ 2008-02-22 22:26 ` Steve Heflin
2008-02-22 22:36 ` Josh Boyer
2008-02-29 21:34 ` Sequoia build with KDBG Steve Heflin
[not found] ` <200802292133.m1TLXqv3012273@e36.co.us.ibm.com>
2 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Steve Heflin @ 2008-02-22 22:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Josh Boyer; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
FLAT_MEM is one of the configuration options:
CONFIG_ARCH_FLATMEM_ENABLE=y
At 03:52 PM 2/22/2008, Josh Boyer wrote:
>On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 11:12:47 -0500
>Steve Heflin <sheflin@newagemicro.com> wrote:
>
> > To reproduce the problem and see the details on section mismatches:
> >
> > make ARCH=powerpc sequoia_defconfig
> >
> > make ARCH=powerpc CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y
>
>All of those warnings are in drivers or common code. And yes, they
>should eventually all be fixed.
>
> > >After modifying the make launch to include the recommended option
> > >shown above, I see that the section mismatch warning is due to data
> > >structures containing the address of initialization modules which
> > >have the __init attribute. Since the memory model is FLAT, is
> this a problem?
>
>What do you mean by "the memory model is FLAT"?
>
>josh
>_______________________________________________
>Linuxppc-embedded mailing list
>Linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
>https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: MODPOST section mismatches
2008-02-22 22:26 ` Steve Heflin
@ 2008-02-22 22:36 ` Josh Boyer
2008-02-22 23:07 ` Steve Heflin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Josh Boyer @ 2008-02-22 22:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steve Heflin; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 17:26:52 -0500
Steve Heflin <sheflin@newagemicro.com> wrote:
> FLAT_MEM is one of the configuration options:
> CONFIG_ARCH_FLATMEM_ENABLE=y
That has to do with NUMA stuff. It really doesn't have much bearing on
the section warnings.
josh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: MODPOST section mismatches
2008-02-22 22:36 ` Josh Boyer
@ 2008-02-22 23:07 ` Steve Heflin
2008-02-23 0:30 ` Josh Boyer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Steve Heflin @ 2008-02-22 23:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Josh Boyer; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
At 05:36 PM 2/22/2008, you wrote:
>On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 17:26:52 -0500
>Steve Heflin <sheflin@newagemicro.com> wrote:
>
> > FLAT_MEM is one of the configuration options:
> > CONFIG_ARCH_FLATMEM_ENABLE=y
>
>That has to do with NUMA stuff. It really doesn't have much bearing on
>the section warnings.
ah, thanks for setting me straight. I thought it meant that
everything existed in a flat address space and existed in memory at
the same time, and therefore the different section warnings might not apply.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: MODPOST section mismatches
2008-02-22 23:07 ` Steve Heflin
@ 2008-02-23 0:30 ` Josh Boyer
2008-02-23 0:38 ` Steve Heflin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Josh Boyer @ 2008-02-23 0:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steve Heflin; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 18:07:37 -0500
Steve Heflin <sheflin@newagemicro.com> wrote:
> At 05:36 PM 2/22/2008, you wrote:
> >On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 17:26:52 -0500
> >Steve Heflin <sheflin@newagemicro.com> wrote:
> >
> > > FLAT_MEM is one of the configuration options:
> > > CONFIG_ARCH_FLATMEM_ENABLE=y
> >
> >That has to do with NUMA stuff. It really doesn't have much bearing on
> >the section warnings.
>
> ah, thanks for setting me straight. I thought it meant that
> everything existed in a flat address space and existed in memory at
> the same time, and therefore the different section warnings might not apply.
Nah. The section warnings come about because if something is marked
__init but referenced in a function that isn't then an oops could occur
because the __init sections are discarded after a certain point in the
kernel boot. The same is true for __devinit, etc.
So the section warnings are still bugs that need fixing, but they're
orthogonal to the memory model for the most part.
josh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: MODPOST section mismatches
2008-02-23 0:30 ` Josh Boyer
@ 2008-02-23 0:38 ` Steve Heflin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Steve Heflin @ 2008-02-23 0:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Josh Boyer; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
At 07:30 PM 2/22/2008, you wrote:
>On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 18:07:37 -0500
>Steve Heflin <sheflin@newagemicro.com> wrote:
>
> > At 05:36 PM 2/22/2008, you wrote:
> > >On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 17:26:52 -0500
> > >Steve Heflin <sheflin@newagemicro.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > FLAT_MEM is one of the configuration options:
> > > > CONFIG_ARCH_FLATMEM_ENABLE=y
> > >
> > >That has to do with NUMA stuff. It really doesn't have much bearing on
> > >the section warnings.
> >
> > ah, thanks for setting me straight. I thought it meant that
> > everything existed in a flat address space and existed in memory at
> > the same time, and therefore the different section warnings might
> not apply.
>
>Nah. The section warnings come about because if something is marked
>__init but referenced in a function that isn't then an oops could occur
>because the __init sections are discarded after a certain point in the
>kernel boot. The same is true for __devinit, etc.
>
>So the section warnings are still bugs that need fixing, but they're
>orthogonal to the memory model for the most part.
>
>josh
Isn't there a way to keep the __init sections from being discarded
such that I can run it without an oops occurring?
thanks for your help!
Steve
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Sequoia build with KDBG
2008-02-22 20:52 ` Josh Boyer
2008-02-22 22:26 ` Steve Heflin
@ 2008-02-29 21:34 ` Steve Heflin
[not found] ` <200802292133.m1TLXqv3012273@e36.co.us.ibm.com>
2 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Steve Heflin @ 2008-02-29 21:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Josh Boyer; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
I attempted to enable the kernel debugger on my Sequoia board, and I
get build errors:
/linux-2.6.25-rc3/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:254: undefined
reference to `set_debug_traps'
/linux-2.6.25-rc3/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:259: undefined
reference to `breakpoint'
Josh: I assume you have used the kernel debugger with your 44x
boards, how did you build it?
thanks so much,
Steve
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <200802292133.m1TLXqv3012273@e36.co.us.ibm.com>]
* Re: Sequoia build with KDBG
[not found] ` <200802292133.m1TLXqv3012273@e36.co.us.ibm.com>
@ 2008-02-29 21:35 ` Josh Boyer
2008-02-29 22:31 ` Steve Heflin
[not found] ` <200802292230.m1TMUk4I005462@e31.co.us.ibm.com>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Josh Boyer @ 2008-02-29 21:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steve Heflin; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 16:34:09 -0500
Steve Heflin <sheflin@newagemicro.com> wrote:
> I attempted to enable the kernel debugger on my Sequoia board, and I
> get build errors:
> /linux-2.6.25-rc3/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:254: undefined
> reference to `set_debug_traps'
> /linux-2.6.25-rc3/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:259: undefined
> reference to `breakpoint'
>
> Josh: I assume you have used the kernel debugger with your 44x
> boards, how did you build it?
Why would you assume that? I've never used kgdb on arch/powerpc
kernels, nor have I ever tried to build it.
I don't think kgdb is ported to powerpc at the moment.
josh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Sequoia build with KDBG
2008-02-29 21:35 ` Josh Boyer
@ 2008-02-29 22:31 ` Steve Heflin
2008-02-29 22:58 ` Scott Wood
2008-03-01 0:16 ` Wolfgang Denk
[not found] ` <200802292230.m1TMUk4I005462@e31.co.us.ibm.com>
1 sibling, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Steve Heflin @ 2008-02-29 22:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Josh Boyer; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
At 04:35 PM 2/29/2008, Josh Boyer wrote:
>On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 16:34:09 -0500
>Steve Heflin <sheflin@newagemicro.com> wrote:
>
> > I attempted to enable the kernel debugger on my Sequoia board, and I
> > get build errors:
> > /linux-2.6.25-rc3/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:254: undefined
> > reference to `set_debug_traps'
> > /linux-2.6.25-rc3/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:259: undefined
> > reference to `breakpoint'
> >
> > Josh: I assume you have used the kernel debugger with your 44x
> > boards, how did you build it?
>
>Why would you assume that? I've never used kgdb on arch/powerpc
>kernels, nor have I ever tried to build it.
>
>I don't think kgdb is ported to powerpc at the moment.
>
>josh
I assumed that because I've always needed a debugger when
implementing kernel level components. Since you've implemented kernel
level support for several 44x processors, I just assumed that you
needed kdbg at some point. So you're saying that your additions
worked right out of the gate and you never needed a debugger? You're my hero!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Sequoia build with KDBG
2008-02-29 22:31 ` Steve Heflin
@ 2008-02-29 22:58 ` Scott Wood
2008-02-29 23:28 ` Jon Loeliger
2008-03-01 0:16 ` Wolfgang Denk
1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Scott Wood @ 2008-02-29 22:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steve Heflin; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
Steve Heflin wrote:
> I assumed that because I've always needed a debugger when
> implementing kernel level components. Since you've implemented kernel
> level support for several 44x processors, I just assumed that you
> needed kdbg at some point. So you're saying that your additions
> worked right out of the gate and you never needed a debugger? You're my hero!
There are ways of debugging that don't involve a debugger.
-Scott
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Sequoia build with KDBG
2008-02-29 22:31 ` Steve Heflin
2008-02-29 22:58 ` Scott Wood
@ 2008-03-01 0:16 ` Wolfgang Denk
2008-03-01 1:48 ` Steve Heflin
1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Wolfgang Denk @ 2008-03-01 0:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steve Heflin; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
In message <20080229223046.1B332DDE0A@ozlabs.org> you wrote:
>
> I assumed that because I've always needed a debugger when
> implementing kernel level components. Since you've implemented kernel
> level support for several 44x processors, I just assumed that you
> needed kdbg at some point. So you're saying that your additions
> worked right out of the gate and you never needed a debugger? You're my hero!
Many people working on this stuff use a BDI2000 / BDI3000. Makes life
much easier...
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@denx.de
I have the simplest tastes. I am always satisfied with the best.
-- Oscar Wilde
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Sequoia build with KDBG
2008-03-01 0:16 ` Wolfgang Denk
@ 2008-03-01 1:48 ` Steve Heflin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Steve Heflin @ 2008-03-01 1:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Wolfgang Denk; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
At 07:16 PM 2/29/2008, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>In message <20080229223046.1B332DDE0A@ozlabs.org> you wrote:
> >
> > I assumed that because I've always needed a debugger when
> > implementing kernel level components. Since you've implemented kernel
> > level support for several 44x processors, I just assumed that you
> > needed kdbg at some point. So you're saying that your additions
> > worked right out of the gate and you never needed a
> debugger? You're my hero!
>
>Many people working on this stuff use a BDI2000 / BDI3000. Makes life
>much easier...
Wolfgang, you hit the nail on the head. Trying to debug a target
without a JTAG debugger is a pain.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <200802292230.m1TMUk4I005462@e31.co.us.ibm.com>]
* Re: Sequoia build with KDBG
[not found] ` <200802292230.m1TMUk4I005462@e31.co.us.ibm.com>
@ 2008-02-29 22:51 ` Josh Boyer
[not found] ` <200803010023.m210NHwr011345@e2.ny.us.ibm.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Josh Boyer @ 2008-02-29 22:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steve Heflin; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 17:31:10 -0500
Steve Heflin <sheflin@newagemicro.com> wrote:
> At 04:35 PM 2/29/2008, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 16:34:09 -0500
> >Steve Heflin <sheflin@newagemicro.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I attempted to enable the kernel debugger on my Sequoia board, and I
> > > get build errors:
> > > /linux-2.6.25-rc3/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:254: undefined
> > > reference to `set_debug_traps'
> > > /linux-2.6.25-rc3/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:259: undefined
> > > reference to `breakpoint'
> > >
> > > Josh: I assume you have used the kernel debugger with your 44x
> > > boards, how did you build it?
> >
> >Why would you assume that? I've never used kgdb on arch/powerpc
> >kernels, nor have I ever tried to build it.
>
> I assumed that because I've always needed a debugger when
> implementing kernel level components. Since you've implemented kernel
> level support for several 44x processors, I just assumed that you
> needed kdbg at some point. So you're saying that your additions
Nope. I did the poor man's method of manually poking characters out of
the serial port.
> worked right out of the gate and you never needed a debugger? You're my hero!
I largely stood on the shoulders of those that came before me. Porting
has become trivial lately, mostly due to the collective work lots of
people have put in.
That all being said, I'm not opposed to having kgdb work on 4xx. I
just have never personally looked at it yet. Patches welcome :).
josh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: Sequoia build with KDBG
@ 2008-03-01 0:36 Steve Heflin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Steve Heflin @ 2008-03-01 0:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-embedded
At 05:51 PM 2/29/2008, you wrote:
>On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 17:31:10 -0500
>Steve Heflin <sheflin@newagemicro.com> wrote:
>
> > At 04:35 PM 2/29/2008, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > >On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 16:34:09 -0500
> > >Steve Heflin <sheflin@newagemicro.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I attempted to enable the kernel debugger on my Sequoia board, and I
> > > > get build errors:
> > > > /linux-2.6.25-rc3/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:254: undefined
> > > > reference to `set_debug_traps'
> > > > /linux-2.6.25-rc3/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:259: undefined
> > > > reference to `breakpoint'
> > > >
> > > > Josh: I assume you have used the kernel debugger with your 44x
> > > > boards, how did you build it?
> > >
> > >Why would you assume that? I've never used kgdb on arch/powerpc
> > >kernels, nor have I ever tried to build it.
> >
> > I assumed that because I've always needed a debugger when
> > implementing kernel level components. Since you've implemented kernel
> > level support for several 44x processors, I just assumed that you
> > needed kdbg at some point. So you're saying that your additions
>
>Nope. I did the poor man's method of manually poking characters out of
>the serial port.
>
> > worked right out of the gate and you never needed a
> debugger? You're my hero!
>
>I largely stood on the shoulders of those that came before me. Porting
>has become trivial lately, mostly due to the collective work lots of
>people have put in.
>
>That all being said, I'm not opposed to having kgdb work on 4xx. I
>just have never personally looked at it yet. Patches welcome :).
>
>josh
poor man's debugging works fine if a serial port is available, but my
Sequoia platform doesn't get that far! I use u-boot to download and
boot my image, and I don't get any serial output after the boot completes:
=> bootm 0x500000
## Booting image at 00500000 ...
Image Name: Kernel and Ramdisk
Created: 2008-03-01 0:09:57 UTC
Image Type: PowerPC Linux Multi-File Image (gzip compressed)
Data Size: 2430248 Bytes = 2.3 MB
Load Address: 00000000
Entry Point: 00000000
Contents:
Image 0: 1471523 Bytes = 1.4 MB
Image 1: 958712 Bytes = 936.2 kB
Verifying Checksum ... OK
Uncompressing Multi-File Image ... OK
Loading Ramdisk to 07e42000, end 07f2c0f8 ... OK
------
console port is now dead.
------
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-03-02 14:47 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-02-21 21:33 MODPOST section mismatches Steve Heflin
2008-02-22 16:12 ` Steve Heflin
2008-02-22 20:52 ` Josh Boyer
2008-02-22 22:26 ` Steve Heflin
2008-02-22 22:36 ` Josh Boyer
2008-02-22 23:07 ` Steve Heflin
2008-02-23 0:30 ` Josh Boyer
2008-02-23 0:38 ` Steve Heflin
2008-02-29 21:34 ` Sequoia build with KDBG Steve Heflin
[not found] ` <200802292133.m1TLXqv3012273@e36.co.us.ibm.com>
2008-02-29 21:35 ` Josh Boyer
2008-02-29 22:31 ` Steve Heflin
2008-02-29 22:58 ` Scott Wood
2008-02-29 23:28 ` Jon Loeliger
2008-03-01 0:16 ` Wolfgang Denk
2008-03-01 1:48 ` Steve Heflin
[not found] ` <200802292230.m1TMUk4I005462@e31.co.us.ibm.com>
2008-02-29 22:51 ` Josh Boyer
[not found] ` <200803010023.m210NHwr011345@e2.ny.us.ibm.com>
2008-03-01 2:30 ` Josh Boyer
2008-03-01 2:55 ` Steve Heflin
2008-03-02 14:47 ` Wolfgang Denk
2008-03-01 5:02 ` Olof Johansson
2008-03-01 13:13 ` Josh Boyer
2008-03-01 15:57 ` Olof Johansson
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-03-01 0:36 Steve Heflin
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).