From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E9EAC433DF for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 22:46:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F34EB2053B for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 22:46:44 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org F34EB2053B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.crashing.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BH7vR1fP5zDqMC for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 08:46:43 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=permerror (SPF Permanent Error: Unknown mechanism found: ip:192.40.192.88/32) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.crashing.org (client-ip=63.228.1.57; helo=gate.crashing.org; envelope-from=segher@kernel.crashing.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.crashing.org Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BH7ry6Ln1zDqPC for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 08:44:33 +1000 (AEST) Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id 06TMiTG1009810; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 17:44:29 -0500 Received: (from segher@localhost) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id 06TMiS25009808; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 17:44:28 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: gate.crashing.org: segher set sender to segher@kernel.crashing.org using -f Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 17:44:27 -0500 From: Segher Boessenkool To: Vladis Dronov Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: fix function annotations to avoid section mismatch warnings with gcc-10 Message-ID: <20200729224427.GI17447@gate.crashing.org> References: <20200729133741.62789-1-vdronov@redhat.com> <20200729144949.GF17447@gate.crashing.org> <584129967.9672326.1596051896801.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <584129967.9672326.1596051896801.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K . V" , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 03:44:56PM -0400, Vladis Dronov wrote: > > > Certain warnings are emitted for powerpc code when building with a gcc-10 > > > toolset: > > > > > > WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text.unlikely+0x377c): Section mismatch in > > > reference from the function remove_pmd_table() to the function > > > .meminit.text:split_kernel_mapping() > > > The function remove_pmd_table() references > > > the function __meminit split_kernel_mapping(). > > > This is often because remove_pmd_table lacks a __meminit > > > annotation or the annotation of split_kernel_mapping is wrong. > > > > > > Add the appropriate __init and __meminit annotations to make modpost not > > > complain. In all the cases there are just a single callsite from another > > > __init or __meminit function: > > > > > > __meminit remove_pagetable() -> remove_pud_table() -> remove_pmd_table() > > > __init prom_init() -> setup_secure_guest() > > > __init xive_spapr_init() -> xive_spapr_disabled() > > > > So what changed? These functions were inlined with older compilers, but > > not anymore? > > Yes, exactly. Gcc-10 does not inline them anymore. If this is because of my > build system, this can happen to others also. > > The same thing was fixed by Linus in e99332e7b4cd ("gcc-10: mark more functions > __init to avoid section mismatch warnings"). It sounds like this is part of "-finline-functions was retuned" on ? So everyone should see it (no matter what config or build system), and it is a good thing too :-) Thanks for the confirmation, Segher