[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190826151808.upis57cckcpf2new@treble>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 10:18:08 -0500
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: He Zhe <zhe.he@...driver.com>
Cc: ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, kafai@...com,
songliubraving@...com, yhs@...com, ndesaulniers@...gle.com,
miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com, luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com,
schwidefsky@...ibm.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, mst@...hat.com,
gor@...ux.ibm.com, andreyknvl@...gle.com,
liuxiaozhou@...edance.com, yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: kernel/bpf/core.o: warning: objtool: ___bpf_prog_run.cold()+0x7:
call without frame pointer save/setup
On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 10:42:53PM +0800, He Zhe wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Since 3193c0836f20 ("bpf: Disable GCC -fgcse optimization for ___bpf_prog_run()"),
> We have got the following warning,
> kernel/bpf/core.o: warning: objtool: ___bpf_prog_run.cold()+0x7: call without frame pointer save/setup
>
> If reverting the above commit, we will get the following warning,
> kernel/bpf/core.o: warning: objtool: ___bpf_prog_run()+0x8b9: sibling call from callable instruction with modified stack frame
> if CONFIG_RETPOLINE=n, and no warning if CONFIG_RETPOLINE=y
Can you please share the following:
- core.o file
The following would also be helpful for me to try to recreate it:
- config file
- compiler version
- kernel version
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists