On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 02:38:10PM -0500, Jonathan Kliegman wrote: > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 06, 2013 at 03:22:39PM -0500, Jonathan Kliegman wrote: > >> On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 4:36 AM, Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > Hi Jonathan. > >> > > >> >> The section mismatch warning can be easy to miss during the kernel build > >> >> process. Allow it to be marked as fatal to be easily caught and prevent > >> >> bugs from slipping in. > >> >> > >> >> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Kliegman <kliegs@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > > >> > Another way to make them much more visible would be to make > >> > the warnings always be verbose. > >> > >> I'd like to keep the option for a hard fail if a mismatch is detected. > >> This way automated build systems will detect the failed build and can > >> reject a chan > >> > >> > In other words drop support for the "-S" options used below: > >> >> $(if $(CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH),,-S) > >> > > >> > Previously the dev* stuff caused a lot of warnings, but > >> > since we have HOTPLUG always enabled this is a non-issue. > >> > So I think that this is a good time to enable the verboce > >> > warnings. > >> I can submit a second patch for this if you'd like, but I'm not > >> familiar with all the previous decisions in this area. If I > >> understand correctly we'll still need the config option as it also > >> changes compiler flags for inlining. > > > > Correct. > > We need one config option that allows us to debug section mismatchs. > > This options adds another gcc option as you also points out. > > And this is the one that already exist. > > > > And then you suggest to add another options which makes section > > mismatch warnings fatal. > > This sounds like a good idea but reverse the logic. > > Something like: > > > > CONFIG_SECTION_MISMATCH_WARN > > bool "Section mismatch warnings produced by modpost are non-fatal" > > default y > > help > > bla bla > > > > Because then you do not cause section mismatch to be fatal for allyesconfig and > > allmodconfig builds. We really do not want to go there yet (I think). > > I must admit I do not know how many section mismatch warnigns that are lingering > > for the different architectures. > > If the number is sufficiently low then we could consider go for fatal as default. > > > > > > And it would be good to have first patch that makes section mismatch warnings verbose, > > independent on any config options. > > > > This patch would have to do something like: > > - Makes it possible to set CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH using menuconfig (I recall there are > > a dependency that avoids this today) > > - Drop support for the -S options and drop the bits that set it > > - Drop the reference to CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH in modpost error message > > > > I would be happy if you could do this and test it. > Ok - I understand what you mean now. I'll put this together as a two > patch sequence then and upload it later this week. Should I start a > new thread with that since its adding a new patch? Or just respond > here with it? Start a new thread. Sam -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
