linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 08/46] static_call, lto: Mark static keys as _

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]

Date:   Mon, 14 Nov 2022 16:51:07 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     "Jiri Slaby (SUSE)" <jirislaby@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
        Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        Martin Liska <mliska@...e.cz>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/46] static_call, lto: Mark static keys as __visible

On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 12:43:06PM +0100, Jiri Slaby (SUSE) wrote:
> From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
> 
> Symbols referenced from assembler (either directly or e.f. from
> DEFINE_STATIC_KEY()) need to be global and visible in gcc LTO because
> they could end up in a different object file than the assembler. This
> can lead to linker errors without this patch.
> 
> So mark static call functions as __visible, namely static keys here.

Why doesn't llvm-lto need this?

Also, why am I getting a random selection of the patchset?