Home » Mailing list archives » linux-kernel » 2008 » May » 2

Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
[view in full thread]
From: David Miller
Subject: Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem
Date: Friday, May 2, 2008 - 3:02 pm

From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 14:11:18 -0700


It's "constness", as Jakub mentioned, not inlineability, that triggers
this bug.

That's why his workaround of using an empty asm("") to the function is
an effective workaround, because the compiler can no longer internally
decide that the function is "const".
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] /dev/mem gcc weak function workaround, Venki Pallipadi, (Tue Apr 29, 6:31 pm)
Re: [PATCH] /dev/mem gcc weak function workaround, David Miller, (Tue Apr 29, 9:28 pm)
RE: [PATCH] /dev/mem gcc weak function workaround, Pallipadi, Venkatesh, (Wed Apr 30, 5:49 am)
Re: [PATCH] /dev/mem gcc weak function workaround, Tom Rini, (Wed Apr 30, 1:15 pm)
huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Adrian Bunk, (Thu May 1, 2:56 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Andrew Morton, (Thu May 1, 3:20 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Linus Torvalds, (Thu May 1, 3:27 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Andrew Morton, (Thu May 1, 3:33 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Venki Pallipadi, (Thu May 1, 3:35 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Andrew Morton, (Thu May 1, 3:42 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Jakub Jelinek, (Thu May 1, 3:49 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, David Miller, (Thu May 1, 3:51 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Tom Rini, (Thu May 1, 4:21 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Tom Rini, (Thu May 1, 4:23 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Tom Rini, (Thu May 1, 4:24 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Venki Pallipadi, (Thu May 1, 4:30 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Andrew Morton, (Thu May 1, 4:59 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Justin Mattock, (Thu May 1, 5:21 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Linus Torvalds, (Thu May 1, 5:34 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Suresh Siddha, (Thu May 1, 5:39 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Vegard Nossum, (Fri May 2, 12:18 am)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Adrian Bunk, (Fri May 2, 1:10 am)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Andi Kleen, (Fri May 2, 2:09 am)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Theodore Tso, (Fri May 2, 6:43 am)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Fri May 2, 2:09 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Fri May 2, 2:11 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, Adrian Bunk, (Fri May 2, 2:19 pm)
Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem, David Miller, (Fri May 2, 3:02 pm)
[2.6.26 patch] #error for gcc 4.1.{0,1}, Adrian Bunk, (Thu Jun 26, 3:37 am)