On Sun, 01 May 2011 15:59:12 -0700 "H. Peter Anvin"<hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 05/01/2011 12:25 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 16:26:35 +0200 Hans Rosenfeld<hans.rosenfeld@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Avoid potential gcc bug by not using a weak function for
arch_dup_task_struct. Use an #ifdef'ed static function for
archs that don't have a special arch_dup_task_struct implementation.
The patch is unreviewable (and hence unusable) if you don't describe
this "potential gcc bug".
http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0804.3/3202.html
gcc-4.1.0 and 4.1.1 were explicitly banned via a test in
include/linux/compiler-gcc4.h for this reason.