[PATCH v1 0/2] kexec: Remove "weak" annotations from headers

[Baoquan He]

Hi Bjorn,

There are changes I have made to solve 5-level conflict with
kexec/kdump and also interface unification task, they will involve x86
64 only changes on these functions, I don't think we need remove them if
without any obvious impact or error reported.

Thanks
Baoquan

On 04/13/18 at 11:08am, Philipp Rudo wrote:
> Hi Bjorn,
> 
> in recent patches AKASHI [1] and I [2] made some changes to the declarations
> you are touching and already removed some of the weak statements. The patches
> got accepted on linux-next and will (hopefully) be pulled for v4.17. So you
> should prepare for some merge conflicts. Nevertheless three weak statements
> still remain (arch_kexec_walk_mem & arch_kexec_apply_relocations*) so your
> patch still makes totally sense.
> 
> Thanks
> Philipp
> 
> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/6/201
> [2] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/21/278
> 
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 13:23:29 -0500
> Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas at kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> > "Weak" annotations in header files are error-prone because they make
> > every definition weak.  Remove them from include/linux/kexec.h.
> > 
> > These were introduced in two separate commits, so this is in two
> > patches so they can be easily backported to stable kernels (some of
> > them date back to v4.3 and one only goes back to v4.10).
> > 
> > ---
> > 
> > Bjorn Helgaas (2):
> >       kexec: Remove "weak" from kexec_file function declarations
> >       kexec: Remove "weak" from arch_kexec_walk_mem() declaration
> > 
> > 
> >  include/linux/kexec.h |   24 ++++++++++++------------
> >  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > kexec mailing list
> > kexec at lists.infradead.org
> > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
> > 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> kexec mailing list
> kexec at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec