Re: [PATCH] parisc: fix module loading failure of large kernel modules(take 4)

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Some gcc versions will inline weak functions if they are in scope - even 
> if there is a non-weak function somewhere else. So you MUST NOT have the 
> weak definition in the same file (or indirectly called through some inline 
> functions in a header file) as the call. Because if you do, then any user 
> with the wrong version of gcc will get the weak function semantics, even 
> if it was meant to be overridden by something else.
>   

Yes.  I think this behaviour is considered to be desperately broken by 
the gcc developers and has been fixed in all recent gccs.  There are a 
couple of broken versions, and there have been patches floating around 
to just refuse to use them; otherwise __weak is effectively unusable.  
(Ah, I see Adrian has posted it again and everyone agrees with it.)

On the other hand, I have seen a couple of instances of "inline __weak" 
which is insane, but I don't know if gcc does anything crazy with it, or 
if its common enough to bother warning about.

   J
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/