From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[140.211.169.13])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client CN "smtp.linux-foundation.org",
	Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (verified OK))
	by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4678CDE790
	for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Thu, 22 May 2008 04:42:04 +1000 (EST)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 11:41:47 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: benh@kernel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Add thread_info_cache_init() to all archs
Message-Id: <20080521114147.59ca3551.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <1211392585.8297.218.camel@pasglop>
References: <20080410032354.90CB1DDF0F@ozlabs.org>
	<20080413171953.bde5e9ac.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	<1208133506.6958.82.camel@pasglop>
	<20080413191338.9776ebd0.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	<1208491086.6958.381.camel@pasglop>
	<20080417211905.8ff769fa.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	<1208501061.6958.394.camel@pasglop>
	<1211392585.8297.218.camel@pasglop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Cc: Linux-Arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>, linux-m32r@ml.linux-m32r.org,
	Luke Browning <LukeBrowning@us.ibm.com>, takata@linux-m32r.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/options/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On Wed, 21 May 2008 13:56:25 -0400 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:

> 
> On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 16:44 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > > so what
> > > > about the patch below ?
> > > 
> > > I like it, but the compiler won't ;)
> > > 
> > > > If you're ok, I'll re-send with appropriate sob
> > > > & adapted powerpc part.
> > > 
> > > Sure.
> > > 
> > > > +void __init __attribute__((weak) thread_info_cache_init(void)
> > >
> 
> Back to this old subject...
> 
> I'm having reports that this is not working...
> 
> gcc is seeing the empty weak function and is optimizing it out
> before it gets a chance to link to the arch provided one.
> 
> This would affect that and the other one next to it..
> 
> That seems pretty bad... it causes nasty crashes as we end up having no
> idea what the compiler decided to generate... I suppose we could keep
> the weak stubs out of the file where they are called but that sucks.
> 
> ie. This is some form of gcc 4.1.1
> 
> Is that a known problem ? A gcc issue ? Not sure what is expected from
> those weak functions.

yup, gcc bug.  Discussed recently on lkml, "Subject: Re: huge gcc
4.1.{0,1} __weak problem".  I don't think anything ended up happening
about it though.