Re: 2.6.24-git7: section mismatches woes

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Saturday, 2 of February 2008, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 10:32:52PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 30 of January 2008, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 07:50:43PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > I get these messages, the majority of which seem to be false-positives:
> > > ...
> > > > modpost: Found 35 section mismatch(es).
> > > > To see additional details select "Enable full Section mismatch analysis"
> > > > in the Kernel Hacking menu (CONFIG_SECTION_MISMATCH).
> > > Looking in to these atm.
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > and if I compile the kernel with CONFIG_SECTION_MISMATCH, it breaks resuming
> > > > from RAM.
> > > 
> > > The only functional difference when you enable CONFIG_SECTION_MISMATCH is the
> > > addition of the -fno-inline-functions-called-once to CFLAGS.
> > > So we have some code somewhere that breaks if it is not inlined by gcc.
> > > 
> > > It would be nice to sort out where.
> > > If you have a rough idea where to look
> > 
> > No, I don't.
> > 
> > It looks like there's somewhere in arch/x86, since I ruled out kernel/power and
> > drivers/acpi already.
> 
> Hi Rafael.

Hi,

> Do you plan to look closer into this or do you have an easy receipe so
> I can test myself (on a x86 64 bit box)?

Well, I really don't know how to approach this.  Do you have an x86-64 box with
suspend to RAM working?

Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/