* Paul Mackerras <paulus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar writes:
>
> > * Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > > I recall David Howells had a similar issue with the bootparamter patch
> > > > set. The workaround he used was to add a barrier(); call in the weak
> > > > function to avoid the inline.
> > >
> > > could we add some extra attribute to __weak that would have a similar
> > > effect? Something like __attribute__((noinline)), or something silly
> > > like __attribute__((deprecated)) - just to keep gcc from screwing up
> > > __weak functions? Perhaps adding a section attribute would have a
> > > similar effect? (putting weak definitions into an extra section is
> > > probably helpful anyway)
> >
> > I've applied the patch below to tip/irq/sparseirq - could someone with an
> > affected GCC version please check whether this solves the crash?
>
> I recall from discussions earlier that noinline doesn't fix the problem,
> and I just tested a similar case and verified that adding noinline
> doesn't stop some versions of gcc from inlining them. The empty weak
> functions in kernel/perf_counter.c were getting inlined by the cross-gcc
> (gcc 4.1.1) I use for compiling powerpc kernels on my laptop, and adding
> noinline doesn't help there.
hm, does Yinghai's patch below do the trick? (also in perfcounters/core
and tip/master)
Ingo
-------------------->
>From 01ea1ccaa24dea3552e103be13b7897211607a8b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2008 21:05:06 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] perf_counter: more barrier in blank weak function
Impact: fix panic possible panic
Some versions of GCC inline the weak global function if it's empty.
Add a barrier() to work it around.
Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>
---
kernel/perf_counter.c | 4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/perf_counter.c b/kernel/perf_counter.c
index d7a79f3..37f7716 100644
--- a/kernel/perf_counter.c
+++ b/kernel/perf_counter.c
@@ -45,8 +45,8 @@ hw_perf_counter_init(struct perf_counter *counter)
}
u64 __weak hw_perf_save_disable(void) { return 0; }
-void __weak hw_perf_restore(u64 ctrl) { }
-void __weak hw_perf_counter_setup(void) { }
+void __weak hw_perf_restore(u64 ctrl) { barrier(); }
+void __weak hw_perf_counter_setup(void) { barrier(); }
static void
list_add_counter(struct perf_counter *counter, struct perf_counter_context *ctx)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
