[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <mhng-1d66757a-1be0-4e46-8bbc-0568ceddfeb3@palmerdabbelt-glaptop>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 23:47:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
To: jszhang3@...l.ustc.edu.cn
CC: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, aou@...s.berkeley.edu,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] riscv: improve __ex_table section handling
On Sun, 08 Aug 2021 10:25:09 PDT (-0700), jszhang3@...l.ustc.edu.cn wrote:
> From: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@...nel.org>
>
> Enable BUILDTIME_TABLE_SORT to sort the exception table at build time
> then move exception table to RO_DATA segment.
>
> Jisheng Zhang (2):
> riscv: Enable BUILDTIME_TABLE_SORT
> riscv: Move EXCEPTION_TABLE to RO_DATA segment
>
> arch/riscv/Kconfig | 1 +
> arch/riscv/kernel/vmlinux-xip.lds.S | 1 -
> arch/riscv/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S | 4 ++--
> scripts/sorttable.c | 1 +
> 4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
This seems reasonable, but it's failing for some configurations (at
least tinyconfig) saying there is no __ex_table. I'm not entirely sure
how that comes about, as we've got them for futexes and uaccess.
Maybe the right thing to do here is to fix scripts/sorttable.c so it can
handle files with nothing to sort? I think it's just as simple as a
successful early out like this
diff --git a/scripts/sorttable.h b/scripts/sorttable.h
index a2baa2fefb13..207ddeddb506 100644
--- a/scripts/sorttable.h
+++ b/scripts/sorttable.h
@@ -294,8 +294,9 @@ static int do_sort(Elf_Ehdr *ehdr,
goto out;
}
#endif
+ /* If there is no __ex_table section there is no work do to. */
if (!extab_sec) {
- fprintf(stderr, "no __ex_table in file: %s\n", fname);
+ rc = 0;
goto out;
}
I'm not entirely sure though -- my logic is essentially just "there's no
__ex_table, so there's nothing to sort, so just don't try".
All the configurations I can actually boot have an __ex_table, so I'm
not sure how to test that.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists