On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 03:46:46AM +0530, Raghavendra D Prabhu wrote:
> * On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 09:49:48AM +0100, Ian Campbell <ijc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 04:55 +0530, Raghavendra D Prabhu wrote:
> >>[Sorry if duplicate, one earlier was corrupt]
> >> I got section mismatches reported by modpost in latest build. It got
> >> reported for xen_register_pirq and xen_unplug_emulated_devices
> >> functions.
> >> xen_register_pirq makes reference to
> >> acpi_sci_override_gsi in init.data section; marking
> >> xen_register_pirq with __init is not feasible since calls are made
> >> to it from acpi_register_gsi in non-init contexts. So marking it
> >> __refdata based on assumption that when acpi_sci_override_gsi is
> >> referenced, it is in early stages where it is alive.
> >I don't think this assumption holds, since xen_register_pirq can be
> >called at any time and basically unconditionally references
> Yeah, that has been my guess as well, however I am not privy to the
> inner workings of Xen, so was not sure.
> >If we don't want to remove the __init from acpi_sci_override_gsi then
> >perhaps xen_setup_acpi_sci needs to stash it somewhere?
> >Or maybe xen_register_pirq could take an "int force_irq" which, if not
> >-1, would force a particular IRQ. The callsite in xen_setup_acpi_sci
> >(actually via xen_register_gsi so the param would need to be propagated
> >there) would be the only actual user?
> xen_register_gsi and hence, xen_register_pirq are called from
> init (with xen_setup_acpi_sci) and non-init (with
> acpi_register_gsi_xen); since xen_set_acpi_sci calls it with gsi ==
> acpi_sci_override_gsi and is marked __init, the best way would be to
> call xen_register_gsi and xen_register_pirq with a boolean argument like
> sci_override to obviate the need to use acpi_sci_override_gsi in
> register_pirq. I will send the patch with this change if it looks good.
Hold on, let me rebase #stable/pci.cleanups and see if the issue
Xen-devel mailing list