Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com> writes:
> ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
> >
> > And Andrew has it in 2.5.69-mm4 and is busy pestering me about compile
> > errors.
>
> I'm like that.
And I appreciate it. This was mostly an observation there was
something reminding me to get back and fix the issue.
> I've dropped out a lot of the NORET stuff. It generates warnings on all
> other architectures, because their machine_restart, machine_halt and
> machine_power_off definitions don't have necessary attributes and don't
> have the while(1); at the end.
Yes there is a big const correctness type problem here.
First for machine_restart it is 100% correct. And at least sys_reboot
assumes that machine_restart will not return, even before my patch.
And I don't know of a case where it makes sense for machine_halt and
machine_power_off to return. Hence I deliberately made those cases
the same. Especially as every real implementation I traced does not
return. It is only the stupid cases like on x86 where we don't do
anything that these routines actually return.
In the context of my patch stop_this_cpu needs to be marked noreturn.
As long as the fundamental routines get marked I don't expect to see
a lot of routines getting a while(1); I admit stop_apics also
needs a while(1); but only because gcc cannot trace it.
And since this also generates warnings on other architectures
it looks like someone (me) needs to go through the various
architectures and add a bunch of noreturn attributes to
the appropriate functions.
The basic question is for documenting and enforcing the noreturn
dependency. Is it more of a help or a hindrance to use gcc noreturn
tag?
And while I am pretty certain this is the correct thing to do I
should break this out from the reboot_on_bsp patch. With the
other architectures involved this is enough of a separate issue that a
second set of patches is needed to maintain this cleanly.
Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 15 2003 - 22:00:51 EST