MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20101216173846.8185.82045.stgit@bob.kio>
References: <20101216173614.8185.19462.stgit@bob.kio> <20101216173846.8185.82045.stgit@bob.kio>
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:03:21 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTindCiEeHDhDJhc9o-iZHvts2d1QnH2CxmDtgb6=@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] resources: add arch hook for preventing allocation in
 reserved areas
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>
Cc: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
        linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
        Adam Belay <abelay@mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 984
Lines: 21

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> wrote:
>
> This adds arch_remove_reservations(), which an arch can implement if it
> needs to protect part of the address space from allocation.

Oh, I just realized - we've had gcc (or maybe "as") bugs when the weak
symbol is in the same compilation unit as the caller, and some part of
the toolchain just ends up short-circuiting it (either gcc inlines it,
or maybe it was that as resolves it early). Making the "weak" part not
work, because it binds strongly.

It may be that we don't support those gcc versions any more, but I
thought I'd bring the issue up. It's safer to put the weak functions
in some other file if possible.

                              Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/