lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] objtool: continue if find_insn() fails in decode_instructions()
From
Hi Ingo, Happy New Year!

On 07/01/23 15:51, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Sathvika Vasireddy <sv@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> Currently, decode_instructions() is failing if it is not able to find
>> instruction, and this is happening since commit dbcdbdfdf137b4
>> ("objtool: Rework instruction -> symbol mapping") because it is
>> expecting instruction for STT_NOTYPE symbols.
>>
>> Due to this, the following objtool warnings are seen:
>> [1] arch/powerpc/kernel/optprobes_head.o: warning: objtool: optprobe_template_end(): can't find starting instruction
>> [2] arch/powerpc/kernel/kvm_emul.o: warning: objtool: kvm_template_end(): can't find starting instruction
>> [3] arch/powerpc/kernel/head_64.o: warning: objtool: end_first_256B(): can't find starting instruction
>>
>> The warnings are thrown because find_insn() is failing for symbols that
>> are at the end of the file, or at the end of the section. Given how
>> STT_NOTYPE symbols are currently handled in decode_instructions(),
>> continue if the instruction is not found, instead of throwing warning
>> and returning.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Sathvika Vasireddy <sv@linux.ibm.com>
> The SOB chain doesn't look valid: is Naveen N. Rao, the first SOB line, the
> author of the patch? If yes then a matching From: line is needed.
>
> Or if two people developed the patch, then Co-developed-by should be used:
>
> Co-developed-by: First Co-Author <first@coauthor.example.org>
> Signed-off-by: First Co-Author <first@coauthor.example.org>
> Co-developed-by: Second Co-Author <second@coauthor.example.org>
> Signed-off-by: Second Co-Author <second@coauthor.example.org>
>
> [ In this SOB sequence "Second Co-Author" is the one who submits the patch. ]
>
> [ Please only use Co-developed-by if actual lines of code were written by
> the co-author that created copyrightable material - it's not a courtesy
> tag. Reviewed-by/Acked-by/Tested-by can be used to credit non-code
> contributions. ]
Thank you for the clarification, and for bringing these points to my
attention. I'll keep these things in mind. In this case, since both
Naveen N. Rao and I developed the patch, the below tags
are applicable.

        Co-developed-by: First Co-Author <first@coauthor.example.org>
        Signed-off-by: First Co-Author <first@coauthor.example.org>
        Co-developed-by: Second Co-Author <second@coauthor.example.org>
        Signed-off-by: Second Co-Author <second@coauthor.example.org>

However, I would be dropping this particular patch, since I think Nick's
patch [1] is better to fix the objtool issue.

[1] -
https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/20221220101323.3119939-1-npiggin@gmail.com/



Thanks for reviewing!

- Sathvika

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-03-26 23:33    [W:0.305 / U:0.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site