From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
To: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@synopsys.com>,
Vineet Gupta <vgupta@synopsys.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch: drop duplicate exports of abort()
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 11:38:29 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180102113829.GD28752@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180102113417.GA5078@sudip-tp>
On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 11:34:45AM +0000, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> Hi Arnd,
>
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 11:31:12AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > We now have exports in both architecture code in in common code,
> > which causes a link failure when symbol versioning is eanbled, on
> > four architectures:
> >
> > kernel/exit.o: In function `__crc_abort':
> > exit.c:(*ABS*+0xc0e2ec8b): multiple definition of `__crc_abort'
> >
> > This removes the four architecture specific exports and only
> > leaves the export next to the __weak symbol.
>
> Will it not be better to remove the abort() as they are exactly same
> like the weak function. That was the original plan we had when this
> weak function was done. Like in the attached patch..
If that was the plan, why wasn't it done - why did we end up with a
build-breaking patch merged in -mm?
--
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 8.8Mbps down 630kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 8.21Mbps down 510kbps up
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: linux@armlinux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arch: drop duplicate exports of abort()
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 11:38:29 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180102113829.GD28752@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180102113417.GA5078@sudip-tp>
On Tue, Jan 02, 2018@11:34:45AM +0000, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> Hi Arnd,
>
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2018@11:31:12AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > We now have exports in both architecture code in in common code,
> > which causes a link failure when symbol versioning is eanbled, on
> > four architectures:
> >
> > kernel/exit.o: In function `__crc_abort':
> > exit.c:(*ABS*+0xc0e2ec8b): multiple definition of `__crc_abort'
> >
> > This removes the four architecture specific exports and only
> > leaves the export next to the __weak symbol.
>
> Will it not be better to remove the abort() as they are exactly same
> like the weak function. That was the original plan we had when this
> weak function was done. Like in the attached patch..
If that was the plan, why wasn't it done - why did we end up with a
build-breaking patch merged in -mm?
--
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 8.8Mbps down 630kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 8.21Mbps down 510kbps up
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: linux@armlinux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arch: drop duplicate exports of abort()
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 11:38:29 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180102113829.GD28752@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180102113417.GA5078@sudip-tp>
On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 11:34:45AM +0000, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> Hi Arnd,
>
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 11:31:12AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > We now have exports in both architecture code in in common code,
> > which causes a link failure when symbol versioning is eanbled, on
> > four architectures:
> >
> > kernel/exit.o: In function `__crc_abort':
> > exit.c:(*ABS*+0xc0e2ec8b): multiple definition of `__crc_abort'
> >
> > This removes the four architecture specific exports and only
> > leaves the export next to the __weak symbol.
>
> Will it not be better to remove the abort() as they are exactly same
> like the weak function. That was the original plan we had when this
> weak function was done. Like in the attached patch..
If that was the plan, why wasn't it done - why did we end up with a
build-breaking patch merged in -mm?
--
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 8.8Mbps down 630kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 8.21Mbps down 510kbps up
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-02 11:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-02 10:31 [PATCH] arch: drop duplicate exports of abort() Arnd Bergmann
2018-01-02 10:31 ` Arnd Bergmann
2018-01-02 10:31 ` Arnd Bergmann
2018-01-02 11:16 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-01-02 11:16 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-01-02 11:16 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-01-02 11:34 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2018-01-02 11:34 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2018-01-02 11:34 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2018-01-02 11:38 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2018-01-02 11:38 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-01-02 11:38 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-01-02 12:34 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2018-01-02 12:34 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2018-01-02 12:34 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2018-01-03 16:51 ` Vineet Gupta
2018-01-03 16:51 ` Vineet Gupta
2018-01-03 16:51 ` Vineet Gupta
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180102113829.GD28752@n2100.armlinux.org.uk \
--to=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=Jose.Abreu@synopsys.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com \
--cc=vgupta@synopsys.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.