Re: (hacky) [PATCH] silence MODPOST section mismatch warnings

[Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>]

On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 09:54:27PM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 01:51:47PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Chris Wedgwood <cw@f00f.org>
> > Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 13:34:18 -0700
> > 
> > > MODPOST seems to be spewing bogus warnings.  It's not clear how best
> > > to fix it so perhaps we should silence it for now?
> > 
> > Most of them are legitimate, the only one that needs sorting
> > is the mm/slab.c case and people are working on that.
> > 
> > The rest are useful and I've been working to fix things up
> > on sparc64 and the networking, and in fact I'm very happy
> > about these notifications.
> > 
> > Please don't apply a sledgehammer to this issue, thanks.
> 
> I've not had one accurate one on ARM yet.
You had one patch from me in latest submission to linus that
was a clear bug.

> 
> Here's another example:
> 
> WARNING: init/built-in.o - Section mismatch: reference to .init.text:
>  from .text between 'rest_init' (at offset 0x4c) and 'run_init_process'
> 
> from init/main.c:
> 
> static void noinline rest_init(void)
>         __releases(kernel_lock)
> 
> static void run_init_process(char *init_filename)
> 
> Clearly, it just does _not_ work.
As I have already explained to you this is a binutils issue
that causes this false positive.

The plan is to annotate functions that are not __init that
they intentional reference a function or data in a init section.
I just not there yet.

	Sam