From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Pitre Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/14] ARM: v6k: remove CPU_32v6K dependencies in asm/spinlock.h Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 16:21:08 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: References: <20110117192050.GE23331@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110125165919.GD17286@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110125174636.GE17286@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="8323328-1734949911-1295990470=:8580" Return-path: Received: from mail-vw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.212.46]:37762 "EHLO mail-vw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754051Ab1AYVVM (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jan 2011 16:21:12 -0500 Received: by vws16 with SMTP id 16so150117vws.19 for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 13:21:11 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20110125174636.GE17286@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Dave Martin , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323328-1734949911-1295990470=:8580 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Tue, 25 Jan 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 05:33:14PM +0000, Dave Martin wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux > > wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 04:43:52PM +0000, Dave Martin wrote: > > >> A couple of questions on this: > > >> > > >> 1) I notice these spinlock functions are generally marked inline. > > >> > > >> Is that likely to happen in modules?  If so, there would be a need to > > >> do SMP_ON_UP fixups at module load time -- I don't think that's > > >> currently implemented. > > > > > > No one should be using the arch_* spinlocks directly.  The spinlocks > > > are implemented in out of line code in kernel/spinlock.c > > > > OK--- do think this is something we need a sanity-check for, or does > > this fall into to a category of bad driver implementation which will > > get thrown out during peer review? > > Hmm, actually it looks like you can end up with configurations where the > spinlocks are inlined. > > That means we'll have to get rid of the link-time discarding of the > .exit sections, and discard them along with the .init sections. ... but only when CONFIG_SMP_ON_UP=y. Nicolas --8323328-1734949911-1295990470=:8580-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: nicolas.pitre@linaro.org (Nicolas Pitre) Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 16:21:08 -0500 (EST) Subject: [PATCH 03/14] ARM: v6k: remove CPU_32v6K dependencies in asm/spinlock.h In-Reply-To: <20110125174636.GE17286@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20110117192050.GE23331@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110125165919.GD17286@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110125174636.GE17286@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, 25 Jan 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 05:33:14PM +0000, Dave Martin wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux > > wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 04:43:52PM +0000, Dave Martin wrote: > > >> A couple of questions on this: > > >> > > >> 1) I notice these spinlock functions are generally marked inline. > > >> > > >> Is that likely to happen in modules? ?If so, there would be a need to > > >> do SMP_ON_UP fixups at module load time -- I don't think that's > > >> currently implemented. > > > > > > No one should be using the arch_* spinlocks directly. ?The spinlocks > > > are implemented in out of line code in kernel/spinlock.c > > > > OK--- do think this is something we need a sanity-check for, or does > > this fall into to a category of bad driver implementation which will > > get thrown out during peer review? > > Hmm, actually it looks like you can end up with configurations where the > spinlocks are inlined. > > That means we'll have to get rid of the link-time discarding of the > .exit sections, and discard them along with the .init sections. ... but only when CONFIG_SMP_ON_UP=y. Nicolas