[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220406163703.hhet4ai7ztd7g4j4@treble>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 09:37:03 -0700
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>, kbuild-all@...ts.01.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mbenes@...e.cz, x86@...nel.org,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915.prelink.o: warning: objtool:
__intel_wait_for_register_fw.cold()+0xce: relocation to !ENDBR:
vlv_allow_gt_wake.cold+0x0
On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 09:43:30AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 10:32:51PM -0700, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > More broadly, this issue could theoretically happen in some other places
> > throughout the kernel tree, since _THIS_IP_ is fundamentally unreliable
> > as currently written.
> >
> > So we could look at making _THIS_IP_ more predictable.
> >
> > Inline asm would work better ("lea 0(%rip), %[rip]"), but then you need
> > an arch-dependent implementation...
>
> Well, there's a ton of _THIS_IP_ instances all around, and it would be
> unfortunate to have them grow into actual code :/
What do you mean by growing into actual code? It's still just a single
instruction, as was the immediate load before.
Though, you pasted this on irc:
#define _THIS_IP_ ({ __label__ __here; __here: asm_volatile_goto ("":::: __here); (unsigned long)&&__here; })
which seems decent to me, though less than ideal because it grows an
ENDBR. But I like its arch-independence, so yeah, LGTM.
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists