This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] Modpost section mismatch fix

To: Raghavendra D Prabhu <rprabhu@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] Modpost section mismatch fix
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 10:13:23 -0400
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx, virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Ian Campbell <ijc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 07:14:41 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20110704221646.GB4490@Xye>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <20110703232508.GB4440@Xye> <1309769388.634.51.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110704221646.GB4490@Xye>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
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> 
> wrote:
> >On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 04:55 +0530, Raghavendra D Prabhu wrote:
> >>[Sorry if duplicate, one earlier was corrupt]
> >>Hi,
> >>     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
> >acpi_sci_override_gsi.
> 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
here disappears.

Xen-devel mailing list