[PATCH] acpi: arm64: fix section mismatch warning

From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

In a gcc-11 randconfig build I came across this warning:

WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text.unlikely+0x2c084): Section mismatch in reference from the function next_platform_timer() to the variable .init.data:acpi_gtdt_desc
The function next_platform_timer() references
the variable __initdata acpi_gtdt_desc.
This is often because next_platform_timer lacks a __initdata
annotation or the annotation of acpi_gtdt_desc is wrong.

This happens when next_platform_timer() fails to get inlined
despite the inline annotation. Adding '__init' solves the issue,
and it seems best to remove the 'inline' in the process seems
better anyway.

Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
---
 drivers/acpi/arm64/gtdt.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/arm64/gtdt.c b/drivers/acpi/arm64/gtdt.c
index 0a0a982f9c28..c3ad42470a7c 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/arm64/gtdt.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/arm64/gtdt.c

@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ struct acpi_gtdt_descriptor {
 
 static struct acpi_gtdt_descriptor acpi_gtdt_desc __initdata;
 
-static inline void *next_platform_timer(void *platform_timer)
+static __init void *next_platform_timer(void *platform_timer)
 {
 	struct acpi_gtdt_header *gh = platform_timer;
 

-- 
2.29.2


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Hi Arnd,

On 2021/9/27 22:19, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

In a gcc-11 randconfig build I came across this warning:

WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text.unlikely+0x2c084): Section mismatch in reference from the function next_platform_timer() to the variable .init.data:acpi_gtdt_desc
The function next_platform_timer() references
the variable __initdata acpi_gtdt_desc.
This is often because next_platform_timer lacks a __initdata
annotation or the annotation of acpi_gtdt_desc is wrong.

This happens when next_platform_timer() fails to get inlined
despite the inline annotation. Adding '__init' solves the issue,
and it seems best to remove the 'inline' in the process seems
better anyway.

There was a patch to fix this issue as well [1],
but not merged yet.

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/7f29a149-e005-f13f-2cc4-a9eb737107e1@huawei.com/T/

Thanks
Hanjun

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 9:03 AM Hanjun Guo [off-list ref] wrote:

On 2021/9/27 22:19, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

In a gcc-11 randconfig build I came across this warning:

WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text.unlikely+0x2c084): Section mismatch in reference from the function next_platform_timer() to the variable .init.data:acpi_gtdt_desc
The function next_platform_timer() references
the variable __initdata acpi_gtdt_desc.
This is often because next_platform_timer lacks a __initdata
annotation or the annotation of acpi_gtdt_desc is wrong.

This happens when next_platform_timer() fails to get inlined
despite the inline annotation. Adding '__init' solves the issue,
and it seems best to remove the 'inline' in the process seems
better anyway.

There was a patch to fix this issue as well [1],
but not merged yet.

[1]:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/7f29a149-e005-f13f-2cc4-a9eb737107e1@huawei.com/T/

Right, either of those patches should be fine.

Rafael, can you pick one of them up?

       Arnd

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 9:20 AM Arnd Bergmann [off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 9:03 AM Hanjun Guo [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 2021/9/27 22:19, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

In a gcc-11 randconfig build I came across this warning:

WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text.unlikely+0x2c084): Section mismatch in reference from the function next_platform_timer() to the variable .init.data:acpi_gtdt_desc
The function next_platform_timer() references
the variable __initdata acpi_gtdt_desc.
This is often because next_platform_timer lacks a __initdata
annotation or the annotation of acpi_gtdt_desc is wrong.

This happens when next_platform_timer() fails to get inlined
despite the inline annotation. Adding '__init' solves the issue,
and it seems best to remove the 'inline' in the process seems
better anyway.

There was a patch to fix this issue as well [1],
but not merged yet.

[1]:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/7f29a149-e005-f13f-2cc4-a9eb737107e1@huawei.com/T/

Right, either of those patches should be fine.

Rafael, can you pick one of them up?

I can, but arm54 ACPI changes go in via arm64 as a rule.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 03:03:29PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:

Hi Arnd,

On 2021/9/27 22:19, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

In a gcc-11 randconfig build I came across this warning:

WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text.unlikely+0x2c084): Section mismatch in reference from the function next_platform_timer() to the variable .init.data:acpi_gtdt_desc
The function next_platform_timer() references
the variable __initdata acpi_gtdt_desc.
This is often because next_platform_timer lacks a __initdata
annotation or the annotation of acpi_gtdt_desc is wrong.

This happens when next_platform_timer() fails to get inlined
despite the inline annotation. Adding '__init' solves the issue,
and it seems best to remove the 'inline' in the process seems
better anyway.

There was a patch to fix this issue as well [1],
but not merged yet.

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/7f29a149-e005-f13f-2cc4-a9eb737107e1@huawei.com/T/

I haven't seen this one, it was on linux-acpi list which I don't follow.
I usually rely you, Lorenzo or Sudeep to ack such patches and cc
Will/me.

-- 
Catalin

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 04:16:09PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 9:20 AM Arnd Bergmann [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 9:03 AM Hanjun Guo [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 2021/9/27 22:19, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

In a gcc-11 randconfig build I came across this warning:

WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text.unlikely+0x2c084): Section mismatch in reference from the function next_platform_timer() to the variable .init.data:acpi_gtdt_desc
The function next_platform_timer() references
the variable __initdata acpi_gtdt_desc.
This is often because next_platform_timer lacks a __initdata
annotation or the annotation of acpi_gtdt_desc is wrong.

This happens when next_platform_timer() fails to get inlined
despite the inline annotation. Adding '__init' solves the issue,
and it seems best to remove the 'inline' in the process seems
better anyway.

There was a patch to fix this issue as well [1],
but not merged yet.

[1]:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/7f29a149-e005-f13f-2cc4-a9eb737107e1@huawei.com/T/

Right, either of those patches should be fine.

Rafael, can you pick one of them up?

I can, but arm54 ACPI changes go in via arm64 as a rule.

Queued as https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/596143e3aec3

-- 
Catalin

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 03:03:29PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:

Hi Arnd,

On 2021/9/27 22:19, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

In a gcc-11 randconfig build I came across this warning:

WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text.unlikely+0x2c084): Section mismatch in reference from the function next_platform_timer() to the variable .init.data:acpi_gtdt_desc
The function next_platform_timer() references
the variable __initdata acpi_gtdt_desc.
This is often because next_platform_timer lacks a __initdata
annotation or the annotation of acpi_gtdt_desc is wrong.

This happens when next_platform_timer() fails to get inlined
despite the inline annotation. Adding '__init' solves the issue,
and it seems best to remove the 'inline' in the process seems
better anyway.

There was a patch to fix this issue as well [1],
but not merged yet.

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/7f29a149-e005-f13f-2cc4-a9eb737107e1@huawei.com/T/

My bad, we did not coordinate well - I noticed your Acked-by but as a
rule we should also CC LAKML and Catalin/Will (if they aren't CCed) on
the reply to make sure they can actually see it.

Lorenzo

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

On 2021/10/13 17:02, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 03:03:29PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:

quoted

Hi Arnd,

On 2021/9/27 22:19, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

In a gcc-11 randconfig build I came across this warning:

WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text.unlikely+0x2c084): Section mismatch in reference from the function next_platform_timer() to the variable .init.data:acpi_gtdt_desc
The function next_platform_timer() references
the variable __initdata acpi_gtdt_desc.
This is often because next_platform_timer lacks a __initdata
annotation or the annotation of acpi_gtdt_desc is wrong.

This happens when next_platform_timer() fails to get inlined
despite the inline annotation. Adding '__init' solves the issue,
and it seems best to remove the 'inline' in the process seems
better anyway.

There was a patch to fix this issue as well [1],
but not merged yet.

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/7f29a149-e005-f13f-2cc4-a9eb737107e1@huawei.com/T/

My bad, we did not coordinate well - I noticed your Acked-by but as a
rule we should also CC LAKML and Catalin/Will (if they aren't CCed) on
the reply to make sure they can actually see it.

It's my bad. I will make sure LAKML and Catalin/Will are CCed next time
when I reply the email.

Thanks
Hanjun

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel