[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241108184618.GG38786@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2024 19:46:18 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: nathan@...nel.org
Subject: objtool: Exclude __tracepoints data from ENDBR checks
For some, as of yet unexplained reason, Clang-19, but not GCC,
generates and endless stream of:
drivers/iio/imu/bno055/bno055_ser.o: warning: objtool: __tracepoint_send_chunk+0x20: data relocation to !ENDBR: __SCT__tp_func_send_chunk+0x0
drivers/iio/imu/bno055/bno055_ser.o: warning: objtool: __tracepoint_cmd_retry+0x20: data relocation to !ENDBR: __SCT__tp_func_cmd_retry+0x0
drivers/iio/imu/bno055/bno055_ser.o: warning: objtool: __tracepoint_write_reg+0x20: data relocation to !ENDBR: __SCT__tp_func_write_reg+0x0
drivers/iio/imu/bno055/bno055_ser.o: warning: objtool: __tracepoint_read_reg+0x20: data relocation to !ENDBR: __SCT__tp_func_read_reg+0x0
drivers/iio/imu/bno055/bno055_ser.o: warning: objtool: __tracepoint_recv+0x20: data relocation to !ENDBR: __SCT__tp_func_recv+0x0
Which is entirely correct, but harmless. Add the __tracepoints section
to the exclusion list.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
---
tools/objtool/check.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
--- a/tools/objtool/check.c
+++ b/tools/objtool/check.c
@@ -4573,6 +4573,7 @@ static int validate_ibt(struct objtool_f
!strcmp(sec->name, "__jump_table") ||
!strcmp(sec->name, "__mcount_loc") ||
!strcmp(sec->name, ".kcfi_traps") ||
+ !strcmp(sec->name, "__tracepoints") ||
strstr(sec->name, "__patchable_function_entries"))
continue;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists