[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200711050618.GW597537@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2020 07:06:18 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mhiramat@...nel.org,
bristot@...hat.com, jbaron@...mai.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...nel.org, namit@...are.com, hpa@...or.com, luto@...nel.org,
ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org, jpoimboe@...hat.com,
pbonzini@...hat.com, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
linux@...musvillemoes.dk
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 14/17] static_call: Handle tail-calls
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 08:23:19PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 15:38:45 +0200
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> > GCC can turn our static_call(name)(args...) into a tail call, in which
> > case we get a JMP.d32 into the trampoline (which then does a further
> > tail-call).
> >
> > Teach objtool to recognise and mark these in .static_call_sites and
> > adjust the code patching to deal with this.
> >
>
> Hmm, were you able to trigger crashes before this patch?
No, just a bunch of tail-calls that didn't get patched and would still
point to the trampoline.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists