Re: [PATCH] IOATDMA: fix section mismatches
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 02:51:47PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > From: Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Rename struct pci_driver data so that false section mismatch > warnings won't be produced. > > Sam, ISTM that depending on variable names is the weakest & worst part of > modpost section checking. Should __init_refok work here? I got build > errors when I tried to use it, probably because the struct pci_driver > probe and remove methods are not marked "__init_refok". Relying on naming is obviously a bad thing but without doing so we would have tons of warnings from drivers/ __init_refok is for functions. For this case __initdata_refok could have worked but to be consistent the renaming is much better. Sam - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[PATCH] IOATDMA: fix section mismatches
From: Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Rename struct pci_driver data so that false section mismatch
warnings won't be produced.
Sam, ISTM that depending on variable names is the weakest & worst part of
modpost section checking. Should __init_refok work here? I got build
errors when I tried to use it, probably because the struct pci_driver
probe and remove methods are not marked "__init_refok".
WARNING: drivers/dma/ioatdma.o(.data+0x10): Section mismatch: reference to
.init.text: (between 'ioat_pci_drv' and 'ioat_pci_tbl')
WARNING: drivers/dma/ioatdma.o(.data+0x14): Section mismatch: reference to
.exit.text: (between 'ioat_pci_drv' and 'ioat_pci_tbl')
Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/dma/ioatdma.c |8
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--- linux-2.6.22-rc6.orig/drivers/dma/ioatdma.c
+++ linux-2.6.22-rc6/drivers/dma/ioatdma.c
@@ -556,7 +556,7 @@ static struct pci_device_id ioat_pci_tbl
{ 0, }
};
-static struct pci_driver ioat_pci_drv = {
+static struct pci_driver ioat_pci_driver = {
.name = "ioatdma",
.id_table = ioat_pci_tbl,
.probe = ioat_probe,
@@ -699,7 +699,7 @@ static int __devinit ioat_probe(struct p
if (err)
goto err_set_dma_mask;
- err = pci_request_regions(pdev, ioat_pci_drv.name);
+ err = pci_request_regions(pdev, ioat_pci_driver.name);
if (err)
goto err_request_regions;
@@ -828,14 +828,14 @@ static int __init ioat_init_module(void)
/* if forced, worst case is that rmmod hangs */
__unsafe(THIS_MODULE);
- return pci_register_driver(_pci_drv);
+ return pci_register_driver(_pci_driver);
}
module_init(ioat_init_module);
static void __exit ioat_exit_module(void)
{
- pci_unregister_driver(_pci_drv);
+ pci_unregister_driver(_pci_driver);
}
module_exit(ioat_exit_module);
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[PATCH] IOATDMA: fix section mismatches
From: Randy Dunlap [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rename struct pci_driver data so that false section mismatch
warnings won't be produced.
Sam, ISTM that depending on variable names is the weakest worst part of
modpost section checking. Should __init_refok work here? I got build
errors when I tried to use it, probably because the struct pci_driver
probe and remove methods are not marked __init_refok.
WARNING: drivers/dma/ioatdma.o(.data+0x10): Section mismatch: reference to
.init.text: (between 'ioat_pci_drv' and 'ioat_pci_tbl')
WARNING: drivers/dma/ioatdma.o(.data+0x14): Section mismatch: reference to
.exit.text: (between 'ioat_pci_drv' and 'ioat_pci_tbl')
Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
drivers/dma/ioatdma.c |8
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--- linux-2.6.22-rc6.orig/drivers/dma/ioatdma.c
+++ linux-2.6.22-rc6/drivers/dma/ioatdma.c
@@ -556,7 +556,7 @@ static struct pci_device_id ioat_pci_tbl
{ 0, }
};
-static struct pci_driver ioat_pci_drv = {
+static struct pci_driver ioat_pci_driver = {
.name = ioatdma,
.id_table = ioat_pci_tbl,
.probe = ioat_probe,
@@ -699,7 +699,7 @@ static int __devinit ioat_probe(struct p
if (err)
goto err_set_dma_mask;
- err = pci_request_regions(pdev, ioat_pci_drv.name);
+ err = pci_request_regions(pdev, ioat_pci_driver.name);
if (err)
goto err_request_regions;
@@ -828,14 +828,14 @@ static int __init ioat_init_module(void)
/* if forced, worst case is that rmmod hangs */
__unsafe(THIS_MODULE);
- return pci_register_driver(ioat_pci_drv);
+ return pci_register_driver(ioat_pci_driver);
}
module_init(ioat_init_module);
static void __exit ioat_exit_module(void)
{
- pci_unregister_driver(ioat_pci_drv);
+ pci_unregister_driver(ioat_pci_driver);
}
module_exit(ioat_exit_module);
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] IOATDMA: fix section mismatches
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 02:51:47PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: From: Randy Dunlap [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rename struct pci_driver data so that false section mismatch warnings won't be produced. Sam, ISTM that depending on variable names is the weakest worst part of modpost section checking. Should __init_refok work here? I got build errors when I tried to use it, probably because the struct pci_driver probe and remove methods are not marked __init_refok. Relying on naming is obviously a bad thing but without doing so we would have tons of warnings from drivers/ __init_refok is for functions. For this case __initdata_refok could have worked but to be consistent the renaming is much better. Sam - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
