Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 17 Apr 2020 14:35:16 +0200 (CEST) | From | Miroslav Benes <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 02/17] objtool: Better handle IRET |
| |
On Fri, 17 Apr 2020, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 01:29:32PM +0200, Miroslav Benes wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Apr 2020, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > + case INSN_EXCEPTION_RETURN: > > > + if (handle_insn_ops(insn, &state)) > > > + return 1; > > > + > > > + /* > > > + * This handles x86's sync_core() case, where we use an > > > + * IRET to self. All 'normal' IRET instructions are in > > > + * STT_NOTYPE entry symbols. > > > + */ > > > + if (func) > > > + break; > > > + > > > + return 0; > > > + > > > case INSN_CONTEXT_SWITCH: > > > if (func && (!next_insn || !next_insn->hint)) { > > > WARN_FUNC("unsupported instruction in callable function", > > > > It looks really simple. > > > > Have you tried Julien's proposal about removing INSN_STACK altogether, > > move the x86 to arch/x86/ and call handle_insn_ops() unconditionally, or > > have you just postponed it? As I said, I think it could be better in the > > long term, but the above looks good for now as well. > > If you look at this other set I send yesterday: > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200416150752.569029800@infradead.org > > (also, sorry for not adding you to the Cc; also best look at the gitweb > version, the patches I send out are missing a hunk and lacking some > back-merges.. clearly I wasn't having a good day yesterday). > > it has this intra_function_calls crud that needs explicit conditional > handle_insn_ops().
Ah, ok. Thanks for letting me know. There are so many patches for objtool flying around now that it is easy to miss something.
Miroslav
| |