Re: [PATCH]memblock: Fix potential section mismatch problem

[Wang YanQing]

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:29:17AM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Wang YanQing <udknight@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > This patch convert __init to __init_memblock
> > for functions which make reference to memblock variable
> > with attribute __meminitdata.
> 
> for which arch?

I just think different arch could have different
meaning about __init and __init_memblock, but
if a function call another function with __init_memblock
annotation or has reference to variable with  __initdata_memblock,
then we have better to give it __init_memblock annotation.


> for x86: __init_memblock is __init, so that is not problem.

Thanks for point out this, then I know why I haven't get
compile warning.

> for other arches like powerpc and sparc etc, __init_memblock is " "
> 
> so you need cc  powerpc, and sparc ...

My first motivation to propose this patch was I found below 
two functions have different annotation which I think they 
should have the same annotation:

"
int __init memblock_is_reserved(phys_addr_t addr)
{
        return memblock_search(&memblock.reserved, addr) != -1;
}

int __init_memblock memblock_is_memory(phys_addr_t addr)
{
        return memblock_search(&memblock.memory, addr) != -1;
}
"


Thanks
--
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/