linux-kernel - Re: New objtool warning..

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20201217162524.fkxiemn7aezpv7d5@treble>
Date:   Thu, 17 Dec 2020 10:25:24 -0600
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: New objtool warning..

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 11:45:56AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 02:01:58PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > So this is kind of tricky, because the unreachable() annotation usually
> > means "the previous instruction is a dead end".  Most of the time, the
> > next instruction -- the one actually pointed to by the annotation -- is
> > actually reachable from another path.
> 
> *groan*, this is why I ended up sticking a nop in
> instrumentation_begin()/_end().

Oh yeah, I forgot about that.  That would be another option if my patch
doesn't work out.

/me grumbles something about integrating objtool with compiler plugins
someday...

-- 
Josh