[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1907030018170.1802@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2019 00:20:22 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...gle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Craig Topper <craig.topper@...el.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>,
Stephen Hines <srhines@...gle.com>,
Chandler Carruth <chandlerc@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: objtool warnings in prerelease clang-9
Nick,
On Tue, 2 Jul 2019, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 2:58 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2 Jul 2019, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
>
> > > This causes objtool to not find any issues in
> > > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/generic.o. I don't observe any duplication
> > > in the __jump_table section of the resulting .o file. It also cuts
> > > down the objtool warnings I observe in a defconfig (listed at the
> > > beginning of the email) from 4 to 2. (platform-quirks.o predates asm
> > > goto,
> >
> > It does not have asm goto inside :)
>
> I think you're conflating arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/generic.o with
> arch/x86/kernel/platform-quirks.o.
Nope. I deliberately split the quote after the platform-quirks part so the
reply goes near to it. Seems it wasn't as obvious as I thought :)
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists