From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934418AbYDQRC0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Apr 2008 13:02:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755747AbYDQRCS (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Apr 2008 13:02:18 -0400 Received: from sous-sol.org ([216.99.217.87]:46756 "EHLO sous-sol.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755550AbYDQRCR (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Apr 2008 13:02:17 -0400 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 10:01:49 -0700 From: Chris Wright To: Bart Van Assche Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Chris Wright , rufus-azrael@numericable.fr, Sam Ravnborg Subject: Re: 2.6.25 section mismatches Message-ID: <20080417170149.GC17220@sequoia.sous-sol.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Bart Van Assche (bart.vanassche@gmail.com) wrote: > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:46 AM, Bart Van Assche > wrote: > > Apparently there is a significant number of section mismatches in the > > 2.6.25 kernel. These were already reported against 2.6.25-rc1 and are > > still present in the final 2.6.25 release. These section mismatches > > show up at least on the i386 and x86_64 architectures. Maybe it's a > > good idea before a patch is merged not only to check whether the patch > > applies cleanly but also to check whether it doesn't create any new > > section mismatches ? > > > > See also http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9974. > > Who should look into this ? Sam, any of these look familiar (or put another way...are there still outstanding section mismatch fixes in -mm)? thanks, -chris