[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20260109144746.4b86aff0@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2026 14:47:46 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>, Catalin Marinas
<catalin.marinas@....com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Laura
Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Masami
Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, puranjay@...nel.org,
usamaarif642@...il.com, kernel-team@...a.com, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64/mm: Fix annotated branch unbootable kernel
On Mon, 5 Jan 2026 21:15:40 +0000
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org> wrote:
> > Another approach is to disable profiling on all arch/arm64 code, similarly to
> > x86, where DISABLE_BRANCH_PROFILING is called for all arch/x86 code. See
> > commit 2cbb20b008dba ("tracing: Disable branch profiling in noinstr
> > code").
>
> Yes, let's start with arch/arm64/. We know that's safe and then if
> somebody wants to make it finer-grained, it's on them to figure out a
> way to do it without playing whack-a-mole.
OK, so by adding -DDISABLE_BRANCH_PROFILING to the Makefile configs and for
the files that were audited, could be opt-in?
CFLAGS_REMOVE_<autdit_file>.o = -DDISABLE_BRANCH_PROFILING
And add that for each file that has been fully audited?
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists