linux-next: Tree for Nov 28 (drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-nxp-s32g.o)

[Vincent Guittot]

On Tue, 2 Dec 2025 at 10:53, Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani at kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2025 at 09:54:24AM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On Tue, 2 Dec 2025 at 05:24, Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani at kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > + Vincent
> >
> > Thanks for looping me in.
> > >
> > > On Sat, Nov 29, 2025 at 07:00:04PM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 11/27/25 9:29 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > Changes since 20251127:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > on i386 (allmodconfig):
> > > >
> > > > WARNING: modpost: vmlinux: section mismatch in reference: s32g_init_pcie_controller+0x2b (section: .text) -> memblock_start_of_DRAM (section: .init.text)
> >
> > Are there details to reproduce the warning ? I don't have such warning
> > when compiling allmodconfig locally
> >
> > s32 pcie can only be built in but I may have to use
> > builtin_platform_driver_probe() instead of builtin_platform_driver()
> >
>
> The is due to calling a function belonging to the __init section from non-init
> function. Ideally, functions prefixed with __init like memblock_start_of_DRAM()
> should be called from the module init functions.
>
> One way to fix would be to call memblock_start_of_DRAM() in probe(), and
> annotate probe() with __init. Since there is no remove, you could use
> builtin_platform_driver_probe().
>
> This also makes me wonder if we really should be using memblock_start_of_DRAM()
> in the driver. I know that this was suggested to you during reviews, but I would
> prefer to avoid it, especially due to this being the __init function.

yeah, I suppose I can directly define the value in the driver has
there is only one memory config for now anyway

/* Boundary between peripheral space and physical memory space */
#define S32G_MEMORY_BOUNDARY_ADDR 0x80000000

>
> - Mani
>
> --
> மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்