x86_64: don't use weak symbols on x86-64

Various gcc versions inline functions that are both weak and hidden,
without even giving a warning.

Certainly the risk exists that we'll see the problem again when
another weak function gets introduced, but I don't see a way to
protect us from that.

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>
Just remove the weak attribute altogether. It's the only one in
non-ia64-specific code. We can get teh same effect with ifdefs which
although a bit unsightly is better than using compiler/linker features
we cannot trust.

Signed-off-by: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>

diff --git a/xen/drivers/acpi/numa.c b/xen/drivers/acpi/numa.c
index 2da987914cfd40c3f2edcb15db5d7925d18e47e8..451773c1c49c0721e1604a7807a4d65e3f4d84cb 100644 (file)
--- a/xen/drivers/acpi/numa.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/acpi/numa.c
@@ -120,14 +120,15 @@ static int __init acpi_parse_slit(struct acpi_table_header *table)
        return 0;
 }
 
-void __init __attribute__ ((weak))
+#ifndef CONFIG_X86
+void __init
 acpi_numa_x2apic_affinity_init(struct acpi_srat_x2apic_cpu_affinity *pa)
 {
        printk(KERN_WARNING PREFIX
               "Found unsupported x2apic [0x%08x] SRAT entry\n", pa->apic_id);
        return;
 }
-
+#endif
 
 static int __init
 acpi_parse_x2apic_affinity(struct acpi_subtable_header *header,