Re: Section Mismatches

[Uwe Kleine-König]

Hello Felipe,

On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 09:08:31AM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 02:26:59PM +0200, ext Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
>> Hi Felipe,
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 02:11:56PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>>> I see that your commit 0db252452378aa7a9e001a13226e1cd1dc61453d removed
>>> the *_driver from the symbol whitelist when referencing init section
>>> (heh, it took a while), but could you explain what's the rationale
>>> behind that ?
>> The rational is that it's AFAIK wrong if a driver references a function
>> that lives in .init.text.
>
> how about all the driver structures ? should they remove __init from  
> probe() or stop saving the probe() function's pointer ?
>
> That can be done for e.g. platform drivers, but for cpufreq_driver  
> structures, I can't see a way to avoid a section mismatch (not without  
> changing the cpufreq code a bit, at least). And, to me, that init has to  
> live in the .init.text section as it's pretty much only called to  
> initialize the frequency table for the cpu.
I think they need handling similar handling like the usb gadget drivers.

See

	http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.ppc.embedded/37291/focus=34468

for the changes I suggested there.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
--
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/