[PATCH] memblock: fix section mismatch warning again

[PATCH] memblock: fix section mismatch warning again

[Mike Rapoport]

From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>

Commit 34dc2efb39a2 ("memblock: fix section mismatch warning") marked
memblock_bottom_up() and memblock_set_bottom_up() as __init, but they could
be referenced from non-init functions like memblock_find_in_range_node() on
architectures that enable CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK.

For such builds kernel test robot reports:
All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>, old ones prefixed by <<):

>> WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text+0x74fea4): Section mismatch in reference from the function memblock_find_in_range_node() to the function .init.text:memblock_bottom_up()
The function memblock_find_in_range_node() references
the function __init memblock_bottom_up().
This is often because memblock_find_in_range_node lacks a __init
annotation or the annotation of memblock_bottom_up is wrong.

Replace __init annotations with __init_memblock annotations so that the
appropriate section will be selected depending on
CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202103160133.UzhgY0wt-lkp@intel.com
Fixes: 34dc2efb39a2 ("memblock: fix section mismatch warning")
Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
---

@Andrew, please let me know if you'd prefer this merged via memblock tree.

 include/linux/memblock.h | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/memblock.h b/include/linux/memblock.h
index d13e3cd938b4..5984fff3f175 100644
--- a/include/linux/memblock.h
+++ b/include/linux/memblock.h
@@ -460,7 +460,7 @@ static inline void memblock_free_late(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
 /*
  * Set the allocation direction to bottom-up or top-down.
  */
-static inline __init void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
+static inline __init_memblock void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
 {
 	memblock.bottom_up = enable;
 }
@@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ static inline __init void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
  * if this is true, that said, memblock will allocate memory
  * in bottom-up direction.
  */
-static inline __init bool memblock_bottom_up(void)
+static inline __init_memblock bool memblock_bottom_up(void)
 {
 	return memblock.bottom_up;
 }
-- 
2.28.0

[PATCH] memblock: fix section mismatch warning again

[Mike Rapoport]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2309 bytes --]

From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>

Commit 34dc2efb39a2 ("memblock: fix section mismatch warning") marked
memblock_bottom_up() and memblock_set_bottom_up() as __init, but they could
be referenced from non-init functions like memblock_find_in_range_node() on
architectures that enable CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK.

For such builds kernel test robot reports:
All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>, old ones prefixed by <<):

>> WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text+0x74fea4): Section mismatch in reference from the function memblock_find_in_range_node() to the function .init.text:memblock_bottom_up()
The function memblock_find_in_range_node() references
the function __init memblock_bottom_up().
This is often because memblock_find_in_range_node lacks a __init
annotation or the annotation of memblock_bottom_up is wrong.

Replace __init annotations with __init_memblock annotations so that the
appropriate section will be selected depending on
CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202103160133.UzhgY0wt-lkp(a)intel.com
Fixes: 34dc2efb39a2 ("memblock: fix section mismatch warning")
Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
---

@Andrew, please let me know if you'd prefer this merged via memblock tree.

 include/linux/memblock.h | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/memblock.h b/include/linux/memblock.h
index d13e3cd938b4..5984fff3f175 100644
--- a/include/linux/memblock.h
+++ b/include/linux/memblock.h
@@ -460,7 +460,7 @@ static inline void memblock_free_late(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
 /*
  * Set the allocation direction to bottom-up or top-down.
  */
-static inline __init void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
+static inline __init_memblock void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
 {
 	memblock.bottom_up = enable;
 }
@@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ static inline __init void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
  * if this is true, that said, memblock will allocate memory
  * in bottom-up direction.
  */
-static inline __init bool memblock_bottom_up(void)
+static inline __init_memblock bool memblock_bottom_up(void)
 {
 	return memblock.bottom_up;
 }
-- 
2.28.0

Re: [PATCH] memblock: fix section mismatch warning again

[David Hildenbrand]

On 16.03.21 18:13, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> 
> Commit 34dc2efb39a2 ("memblock: fix section mismatch warning") marked
> memblock_bottom_up() and memblock_set_bottom_up() as __init, but they could
> be referenced from non-init functions like memblock_find_in_range_node() on
> architectures that enable CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK.
> 
> For such builds kernel test robot reports:
> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>, old ones prefixed by <<):
> 
>>> WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text+0x74fea4): Section mismatch in reference from the function memblock_find_in_range_node() to the function .init.text:memblock_bottom_up()
> The function memblock_find_in_range_node() references
> the function __init memblock_bottom_up().
> This is often because memblock_find_in_range_node lacks a __init
> annotation or the annotation of memblock_bottom_up is wrong.
> 
> Replace __init annotations with __init_memblock annotations so that the
> appropriate section will be selected depending on
> CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK.
> 
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202103160133.UzhgY0wt-lkp@intel.com
> Fixes: 34dc2efb39a2 ("memblock: fix section mismatch warning")
> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> ---
> 
> @Andrew, please let me know if you'd prefer this merged via memblock tree.
> 
>   include/linux/memblock.h | 4 ++--
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/memblock.h b/include/linux/memblock.h
> index d13e3cd938b4..5984fff3f175 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memblock.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memblock.h
> @@ -460,7 +460,7 @@ static inline void memblock_free_late(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
>   /*
>    * Set the allocation direction to bottom-up or top-down.
>    */
> -static inline __init void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
> +static inline __init_memblock void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
>   {
>   	memblock.bottom_up = enable;
>   }
> @@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ static inline __init void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
>    * if this is true, that said, memblock will allocate memory
>    * in bottom-up direction.
>    */
> -static inline __init bool memblock_bottom_up(void)
> +static inline __init_memblock bool memblock_bottom_up(void)
>   {
>   	return memblock.bottom_up;
>   }
> 

Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb

Re: [PATCH] memblock: fix section mismatch warning again

[David Hildenbrand]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2551 bytes --]

On 16.03.21 18:13, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> 
> Commit 34dc2efb39a2 ("memblock: fix section mismatch warning") marked
> memblock_bottom_up() and memblock_set_bottom_up() as __init, but they could
> be referenced from non-init functions like memblock_find_in_range_node() on
> architectures that enable CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK.
> 
> For such builds kernel test robot reports:
> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>, old ones prefixed by <<):
> 
>>> WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text+0x74fea4): Section mismatch in reference from the function memblock_find_in_range_node() to the function .init.text:memblock_bottom_up()
> The function memblock_find_in_range_node() references
> the function __init memblock_bottom_up().
> This is often because memblock_find_in_range_node lacks a __init
> annotation or the annotation of memblock_bottom_up is wrong.
> 
> Replace __init annotations with __init_memblock annotations so that the
> appropriate section will be selected depending on
> CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK.
> 
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202103160133.UzhgY0wt-lkp(a)intel.com
> Fixes: 34dc2efb39a2 ("memblock: fix section mismatch warning")
> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> ---
> 
> @Andrew, please let me know if you'd prefer this merged via memblock tree.
> 
>   include/linux/memblock.h | 4 ++--
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/memblock.h b/include/linux/memblock.h
> index d13e3cd938b4..5984fff3f175 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memblock.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memblock.h
> @@ -460,7 +460,7 @@ static inline void memblock_free_late(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
>   /*
>    * Set the allocation direction to bottom-up or top-down.
>    */
> -static inline __init void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
> +static inline __init_memblock void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
>   {
>   	memblock.bottom_up = enable;
>   }
> @@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ static inline __init void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
>    * if this is true, that said, memblock will allocate memory
>    * in bottom-up direction.
>    */
> -static inline __init bool memblock_bottom_up(void)
> +static inline __init_memblock bool memblock_bottom_up(void)
>   {
>   	return memblock.bottom_up;
>   }
> 

Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb

Re: [PATCH] memblock: fix section mismatch warning again

[Nick Desaulniers]

On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 10:13 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
>
> Commit 34dc2efb39a2 ("memblock: fix section mismatch warning") marked
> memblock_bottom_up() and memblock_set_bottom_up() as __init, but they could
> be referenced from non-init functions like memblock_find_in_range_node() on
> architectures that enable CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK.
>
> For such builds kernel test robot reports:
> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>, old ones prefixed by <<):
>
> >> WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text+0x74fea4): Section mismatch in reference from the function memblock_find_in_range_node() to the function .init.text:memblock_bottom_up()
> The function memblock_find_in_range_node() references
> the function __init memblock_bottom_up().
> This is often because memblock_find_in_range_node lacks a __init
> annotation or the annotation of memblock_bottom_up is wrong.
>
> Replace __init annotations with __init_memblock annotations so that the
> appropriate section will be selected depending on
> CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK.
>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202103160133.UzhgY0wt-lkp@intel.com
> Fixes: 34dc2efb39a2 ("memblock: fix section mismatch warning")
> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

Thank you Mike.
Acked-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>

> ---
>
> @Andrew, please let me know if you'd prefer this merged via memblock tree.
>
>  include/linux/memblock.h | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/memblock.h b/include/linux/memblock.h
> index d13e3cd938b4..5984fff3f175 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memblock.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memblock.h
> @@ -460,7 +460,7 @@ static inline void memblock_free_late(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
>  /*
>   * Set the allocation direction to bottom-up or top-down.
>   */
> -static inline __init void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
> +static inline __init_memblock void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
>  {
>         memblock.bottom_up = enable;
>  }
> @@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ static inline __init void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
>   * if this is true, that said, memblock will allocate memory
>   * in bottom-up direction.
>   */
> -static inline __init bool memblock_bottom_up(void)
> +static inline __init_memblock bool memblock_bottom_up(void)
>  {
>         return memblock.bottom_up;
>  }
> --
> 2.28.0
>


-- 
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers

Re: [PATCH] memblock: fix section mismatch warning again

[Nick Desaulniers]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2613 bytes --]

On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 10:13 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
>
> Commit 34dc2efb39a2 ("memblock: fix section mismatch warning") marked
> memblock_bottom_up() and memblock_set_bottom_up() as __init, but they could
> be referenced from non-init functions like memblock_find_in_range_node() on
> architectures that enable CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK.
>
> For such builds kernel test robot reports:
> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>, old ones prefixed by <<):
>
> >> WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text+0x74fea4): Section mismatch in reference from the function memblock_find_in_range_node() to the function .init.text:memblock_bottom_up()
> The function memblock_find_in_range_node() references
> the function __init memblock_bottom_up().
> This is often because memblock_find_in_range_node lacks a __init
> annotation or the annotation of memblock_bottom_up is wrong.
>
> Replace __init annotations with __init_memblock annotations so that the
> appropriate section will be selected depending on
> CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK.
>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202103160133.UzhgY0wt-lkp(a)intel.com
> Fixes: 34dc2efb39a2 ("memblock: fix section mismatch warning")
> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

Thank you Mike.
Acked-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>

> ---
>
> @Andrew, please let me know if you'd prefer this merged via memblock tree.
>
>  include/linux/memblock.h | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/memblock.h b/include/linux/memblock.h
> index d13e3cd938b4..5984fff3f175 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memblock.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memblock.h
> @@ -460,7 +460,7 @@ static inline void memblock_free_late(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
>  /*
>   * Set the allocation direction to bottom-up or top-down.
>   */
> -static inline __init void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
> +static inline __init_memblock void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
>  {
>         memblock.bottom_up = enable;
>  }
> @@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ static inline __init void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
>   * if this is true, that said, memblock will allocate memory
>   * in bottom-up direction.
>   */
> -static inline __init bool memblock_bottom_up(void)
> +static inline __init_memblock bool memblock_bottom_up(void)
>  {
>         return memblock.bottom_up;
>  }
> --
> 2.28.0
>


-- 
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers

Re: [PATCH] memblock: fix section mismatch warning again

[Nick Desaulniers]

On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 10:13 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
>
> Commit 34dc2efb39a2 ("memblock: fix section mismatch warning") marked
> memblock_bottom_up() and memblock_set_bottom_up() as __init, but they could
> be referenced from non-init functions like memblock_find_in_range_node() on
> architectures that enable CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK.
>
> For such builds kernel test robot reports:
> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>, old ones prefixed by <<):
>
> >> WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text+0x74fea4): Section mismatch in reference from the function memblock_find_in_range_node() to the function .init.text:memblock_bottom_up()
> The function memblock_find_in_range_node() references
> the function __init memblock_bottom_up().
> This is often because memblock_find_in_range_node lacks a __init
> annotation or the annotation of memblock_bottom_up is wrong.
>
> Replace __init annotations with __init_memblock annotations so that the
> appropriate section will be selected depending on
> CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK.
>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202103160133.UzhgY0wt-lkp@intel.com
> Fixes: 34dc2efb39a2 ("memblock: fix section mismatch warning")
> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

Thank you Mike.
Acked-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>

> ---
>
> @Andrew, please let me know if you'd prefer this merged via memblock tree.
>
>  include/linux/memblock.h | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/memblock.h b/include/linux/memblock.h
> index d13e3cd938b4..5984fff3f175 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memblock.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memblock.h
> @@ -460,7 +460,7 @@ static inline void memblock_free_late(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
>  /*
>   * Set the allocation direction to bottom-up or top-down.
>   */
> -static inline __init void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
> +static inline __init_memblock void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
>  {
>         memblock.bottom_up = enable;
>  }
> @@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ static inline __init void memblock_set_bottom_up(bool enable)
>   * if this is true, that said, memblock will allocate memory
>   * in bottom-up direction.
>   */
> -static inline __init bool memblock_bottom_up(void)
> +static inline __init_memblock bool memblock_bottom_up(void)
>  {
>         return memblock.bottom_up;
>  }
> --
> 2.28.0
>


-- 
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers