From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752514Ab1GDWQy (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jul 2011 18:16:54 -0400 Received: from wnohang.net ([178.79.154.173]:53185 "EHLO mail.wnohang.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752245Ab1GDWQx (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jul 2011 18:16:53 -0400 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 mail.wnohang.net 1E42DF0009 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 mail.wnohang.net 59A0CF0003 Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 03:46:46 +0530 From: Raghavendra D Prabhu To: Ian Campbell Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Modpost section mismatch fix Message-ID: <20110704221646.GB4490@Xye> References: <20110703232508.GB4440@Xye> <1309769388.634.51.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1309769388.634.51.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> X-Operating-System: Arch linux x86_64 3.0.0-rc5-LYM X-Editor: VIM - Vi IMproved 7.3 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-12-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 09:49:48AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: >On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 04:55 +0530, Raghavendra D Prabhu wrote: >> [Sorry if duplicate, one earlier was corrupt] >> Hi, >> I got section mismatches reported by modpost in latest build. It got >> reported for xen_register_pirq and xen_unplug_emulated_devices >> functions. > > >> xen_register_pirq makes reference to >> acpi_sci_override_gsi in init.data section; marking >> xen_register_pirq with __init is not feasible since calls are made >> to it from acpi_register_gsi in non-init contexts. So marking it >> __refdata based on assumption that when acpi_sci_override_gsi is >> referenced, it is in early stages where it is alive. > >I don't think this assumption holds, since xen_register_pirq can be >called at any time and basically unconditionally references >acpi_sci_override_gsi. Yeah, that has been my guess as well, however I am not privy to the inner workings of Xen, so was not sure. > >If we don't want to remove the __init from acpi_sci_override_gsi then >perhaps xen_setup_acpi_sci needs to stash it somewhere? > >Or maybe xen_register_pirq could take an "int force_irq" which, if not >-1, would force a particular IRQ. The callsite in xen_setup_acpi_sci >(actually via xen_register_gsi so the param would need to be propagated >there) would be the only actual user? xen_register_gsi and hence, xen_register_pirq are called from init (with xen_setup_acpi_sci) and non-init (with acpi_register_gsi_xen); since xen_set_acpi_sci calls it with gsi == acpi_sci_override_gsi and is marked __init, the best way would be to call xen_register_gsi and xen_register_pirq with a boolean argument like sci_override to obviate the need to use acpi_sci_override_gsi in register_pirq. I will send the patch with this change if it looks good. > >The xen_unplug_emulated_devices change looks correct to me since >xen_unplug_emulated_devices is called from xen_arch_hvm_post_suspend. > >Ian. > >> -------------------------- >> Raghavendra Prabhu >> GPG Id : 0xD72BE977 >> Fingerprint: B93F EBCB 8E05 7039 CD3C A4B8 A616 DCA1 D72B E977 >> www: wnohang.net >> _______________________________________________ >> Virtualization mailing list >> Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org >> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization