lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Feb]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mm: Provide consistent declaration for num_poisoned_pages
From
Date
On 02/26/2018 03:57 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2018, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>
>> clang reports the following compile warning.
>>
>> In file included from mm/vmscan.c:56:
>> ./include/linux/swapops.h:327:22: warning:
>> section attribute is specified on redeclared variable [-Wsection]
>> extern atomic_long_t num_poisoned_pages __read_mostly;
>> ^
>> ./include/linux/mm.h:2585:22: note: previous declaration is here
>> extern atomic_long_t num_poisoned_pages;
>> ^
>>
>> Let's use __read_mostly everywhere.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
>> Cc: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>
>> ---
>> include/linux/mm.h | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h
>> index ad06d42adb1a..bd4bd59f02c1 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/mm.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/mm.h
>> @@ -2582,7 +2582,7 @@ extern int get_hwpoison_page(struct page *page);
>> extern int sysctl_memory_failure_early_kill;
>> extern int sysctl_memory_failure_recovery;
>> extern void shake_page(struct page *p, int access);
>> -extern atomic_long_t num_poisoned_pages;
>> +extern atomic_long_t num_poisoned_pages __read_mostly;
>> extern int soft_offline_page(struct page *page, int flags);
>>
>>
>
> No objection to the patch, of course, but I'm wondering if it's (1) the
> only such clang compile warning for mm/, and (2) if the re-declaration in

It is the only one I recall seeing in mm/ while testing the clang/retpoline
changes with ToT clang 7.0.0, but then I didn't pay too close attention.

> mm.h could be avoided by including swapops.h?
>

Another alternative would be to remove the extern fom swapops.h and have
swapops.h include mm.h instead. I chose the least invasive change since
I didn't want to risk breaking some other build (after all, maybe there
was a reason for declaring num_poisoned_pages in two include files).

Guenter

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-02-27 03:14    [W:0.039 / U:0.556 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site