[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200624212737.GV4817@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 23:27:37 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
Cc: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/22] kbuild: lto: fix recordmcount
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 01:31:42PM -0700, Sami Tolvanen wrote:
> With LTO, LLVM bitcode won't be compiled into native code until
> modpost_link. This change postpones calls to recordmcount until after
> this step.
>
> In order to exclude specific functions from inspection, we add a new
> code section .text..nomcount, which we tell recordmcount to ignore, and
> a __nomcount attribute for moving functions to this section.
I'm confused, you only add this to functions in ftrace itself, which is
compiled with:
KBUILD_CFLAGS = $(subst $(CC_FLAGS_FTRACE),,$(ORIG_CFLAGS))
and so should not have mcount/fentry sites anyway. So what's the point
of ignoring them further?
This Changelog does not explain.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
