linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christian Engelmayer <cengelma@gmx.at>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Kevin Hao <haokexin@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/sysdev: Fix a mpic section mismatch for MPC85xx
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 22:14:28 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140128221428.4c5b49f2@spike> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131220000041.05da4209@spike>

On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 00:00:41 +0100, Christian Engelmayer <cengelma@gmx.at> wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 11:10:53 +1100 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> > On Sun, 2013-12-15 at 19:38 +0100, Christian Engelmayer wrote:
> > > Moved arch/powerpc/sysdev/mpic.c : smp_mpic_probe() out of the __init section.
> > > It is referenced by arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/smp.c : smp_85xx_setup_cpu().
> > 
> > I don't like this. The reference is not actually going to call into the
> > code at all and as such is not an error, it's just a pointer comparison.
> 
> That's correct. I proposed it that way because on first sight I was concerned
> that there is an address of an __init function assigned to a function pointer
> within a non __initdata struct at all that can be compared against. However,
> further usage of smp_ops->probe is currently safe of course and *_ops symbols
> within .data are whitelisted to refer to init sections.
> 
> > If there is no way to silence the warning, then I'd suggest to use a
> > global flag, something like mpc85xx_pic_type and test that instead
> > of comparing the pointers.
> 
> I've seen that there is currently a patch proposed against
> 
>    commit dc2c9c52b604f51b1416ed87ff54a1c77a1a8b5b
>    powerpc/85xx: Set up doorbells even with no mpic
> 
> that introduced the section causing the warning:
> 
>    http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/289214/
>    powerpc/85xx: don't init the mpic ipi for the SoC which has doorbell support
> 
> This patch also removes the affected pointer comparison and if accepted would
> thus also silence this warning.

Kevin's change (powerpc/85xx: don't init the mpic ipi for the SoC which has
doorbell support) entered mainline by merge 1b17366d. I verified that the
issue is thereby solved and my patch obsolete.

   http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/301402/

Regards,
Christian

      reply	other threads:[~2014-01-28 21:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-12-15 18:38 [PATCH] powerpc/sysdev: Fix a mpic section mismatch for MPC85xx Christian Engelmayer
2013-12-16  0:10 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2013-12-19 23:00   ` Christian Engelmayer
2014-01-28 21:14     ` Christian Engelmayer [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20140128221428.4c5b49f2@spike \
    --to=cengelma@gmx.at \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=haokexin@gmail.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=scottwood@freescale.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).