[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160120104437.GE23186@pd.tnic>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 11:44:37 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Pedro Alves <palves@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com>,
Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@...rovitsch.priv.at>,
Chris J Arges <chris.j.arges@...onical.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 13/25] x86/reboot: Add ljmp instructions to stacktool
whitelist
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 11:42:56PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> I've now gotten the number of warnings down to 0 (except for a few
> staging drivers), even with allyesconfig (with !CONFIG_GCOV).
>
> I've also managed to make stacktool a little smarter such that the
> in-code STACKTOOL_IGNORE_INSN markers are no longer needed, woot!
Oh wow! :-)
> There's still a need for 4 STACKTOOL_IGNORE_FUNC(name) markers in the
> entire tree, due to the weird cases I mentioned. But they're placed
> after the functions, so they're much less disruptive.
Sounds nice.
Thanks!
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists