On Thu, 2015-04-09 at 02:28 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 05:14:49PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > const objects shouldn't be __read_mostly. They are read-only.
> >
> > Marking these objects as __read_mostly causes section conflicts
> > with LTO linking.
> >
> > So add a
On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 05:14:49PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> const objects shouldn't be __read_mostly. They are read-only.
>
> Marking these objects as __read_mostly causes section conflicts
> with LTO linking.
>
> So add a test to try to avoid this issue.
Thanks Joe. Looks good thanks. I
const objects shouldn't be __read_mostly. They are read-only.
Marking these objects as __read_mostly causes section conflicts
with LTO linking.
So add a test to try to avoid this issue.
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches
---
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 10 ++
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 05:14:49PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
const objects shouldn't be __read_mostly. They are read-only.
Marking these objects as __read_mostly causes section conflicts
with LTO linking.
So add a test to try to avoid this issue.
Thanks Joe. Looks good thanks. I suspect
const objects shouldn't be __read_mostly. They are read-only.
Marking these objects as __read_mostly causes section conflicts
with LTO linking.
So add a test to try to avoid this issue.
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches j...@perches.com
---
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 10 ++
1 file changed, 10
On Thu, 2015-04-09 at 02:28 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 05:14:49PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
const objects shouldn't be __read_mostly. They are read-only.
Marking these objects as __read_mostly causes section conflicts
with LTO linking.
So add a test to try to
6 matches
Mail list logo