On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 04:43:52PM +0000, Dave Martin wrote: > A couple of questions on this: > > 1) I notice these spinlock functions are generally marked inline. > > Is that likely to happen in modules? If so, there would be a need to > do SMP_ON_UP fixups at module load time -- I don't think that's > currently implemented.
No one should be using the arch_* spinlocks directly. The spinlocks are implemented in out of line code in kernel/spinlock.c > 2) When building with this patch and CONFIG_SMP_ON_UP=y, I've seen > vmlinux link errors like this: > > LD .tmp_vmlinux1 > `.exit.text' referenced in section `.alt.smp.init' of > drivers/built-in.o: defined in discarded section `.exit.text' of > drivers/built-in.o > make: *** [.tmp_vmlinux1] Error 1 > > I don't know whether this is caused by the patch directly or as a > side-effect -- I've only noticed it in the linaro-2.6.37 tree so far. > git bisect indentified this above patch as the first one with the > error in that case. > > I don't understand the section discarding logic too well, so I'm not > sure how to fix it for now... Hmm. I don't see how that could happen, unless some driver is going behind the spinlock APIs, or using our dsb_sev() directly. I think you need to first track down what's responsible for inserting architecture spinlock code into drivers. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
