From: Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@gmail.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de>
Cc: Sean MacLennan <smaclennan@pikatech.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Section mismatch contig_page_data and bootmem_node_data
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 02:08:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080821000844.GA10031@joi> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87myj74azn.fsf@skyscraper.fehenstaub.lan>
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 11:45:00PM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 21:05:41 +0200
> > Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I thought about this warning today and found 2 other solutions:
> >> 1) Mark contig_page_data as __ref (but it might hide real bugs).
> >> 2) Remove bdata from struct pglist_data and access it directly through
> >> bootmem_node_data. It requires passing node number to all functions
> >> which use bdata, but unfortunately arch/ia64/mm/discontig.c handles
> >> node numbering its own way. I'm still investigating it.
>
> Yeah, I gave it a shot once too but dropped it again after I looked at
> ia64 code.
>
> Perhaps we can just remove the static assignment and do it at boot up?
That won't work - modpost will warn at different place about section
mismatch. But even if it would work, we lose potentially useful
analysis of all uses of pglist_data->bdata.
But I think I found better solution - replace "struct bootmem_data *bdata"
in struct pglist_data with "int bootmem_node;" and change all uses of bdata
to &bootmem_node_data[struct pglist_data *->bootmem_node].
What do you think about it? Would it be acceptable?
PS: restored cc'ing LKML
Marcin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-21 0:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-20 17:55 [PATCH] Section mismatch contig_page_data and bootmem_node_data Sean MacLennan
2008-08-20 19:05 ` Marcin Slusarz
[not found] ` <20080820151531.38fc1071@lappy.seanm.ca>
[not found] ` <87myj74azn.fsf@skyscraper.fehenstaub.lan>
2008-08-21 0:08 ` Marcin Slusarz [this message]
2008-08-21 7:06 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-08-21 20:10 ` Marcin Slusarz
2008-08-22 6:15 ` Andrew Morton
2008-08-22 13:05 ` Marcin Slusarz
2008-08-20 21:53 ` Johannes Weiner
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=20080821000844.GA10031@joi \
--to=marcin.slusarz@gmail.com \
--cc=hannes@saeurebad.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=smaclennan@pikatech.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