Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 30 Jul 2020 11:34:16 -0400 (EDT)
From:   Vladis Dronov <vdronov@redhat.com>
To:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc:     Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>,
        linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
        "Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Message-ID: <842212692.9780293.1596123256621.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <87ft995hv8.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>
References: <20200729133741.62789-1-vdronov@redhat.com> <20200729144949.GF17447@gate.crashing.org> <584129967.9672326.1596051896801.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <20200729224427.GI17447@gate.crashing.org> <87ft995hv8.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: fix function annotations to avoid section
 mismatch warnings with gcc-10
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thread-Topic: powerpc: fix function annotations to avoid section mismatch warnings with gcc-10
Thread-Index: rKp81qyk4KEAfYe/qAP0qUT6DQV0IQ==
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hello, Michael,

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Ellerman" <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: fix function annotations to avoid section mismatch warnings with gcc-10
> 
...
> >> > 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
> > <https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-10/changes.html>?  So everyone should see it
> > (no matter what config or build system), and it is a good thing too :-)
> 
> I haven't seen it in my GCC 10 builds, so there must be some other
> subtlety. Probably it depends on details of the .config.
> 

I've just had this building the latest upstream for the ppc64le with a derivative
of the RHEL-8 config. This can probably be a compiler/linker setting, like -O2
versus -O3.

> cheers

Best regards,
Vladis Dronov | Red Hat, Inc. | The Core Kernel | Senior Software Engineer