From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: kbuild-all@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: stackleak_erase()+0x35: call to ftrace_likely_update() leaves .noinstr.text section
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2022 10:03:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220405080335.GC30877@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220404152502.0621caf9@gandalf.local.home>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1255 bytes --]
On Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 03:25:02PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 11:27:47 -0700
> Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> > I got CCed on this because of stackleak_erase() triggering, this, but it
> > appears to be an existing issue for other callers too. It looks like
> > __branch_check__() shouldn't be emitting ftrace_likely_update() calls
> > for noinstr functions...
> >
> > I have no idea how a macro is meant to check for function attributes,
> > though... :(
>
> Ignore it. It's the branch tracer enabled (that is, every "if ()" is being
> traced).
>
> Although I still use the branch profiler, I do not believe anyone uses the
> branch tracer. The branch profiler updates an array of counters that tells
> when the branch was true or false, the branch tracer actually traces
> (records an event) for every branch in the system!
\o/
> I think I'll just send a patch to nuke the tracer. I'm sure Peter Zijlstra
> will be happy when I do that. But I still want the profiler, as I find that
> useful.
It'll explode the moment Lai's entry rework goes through. That'll make
us run C code before we switch to the kernel address space, so your
counters will not exist/be-mapped and *BOOM*.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
kbuild-all@lists.01.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Subject: Re: vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: stackleak_erase()+0x35: call to ftrace_likely_update() leaves .noinstr.text section
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2022 10:03:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220405080335.GC30877@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220404152502.0621caf9@gandalf.local.home>
On Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 03:25:02PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 11:27:47 -0700
> Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> > I got CCed on this because of stackleak_erase() triggering, this, but it
> > appears to be an existing issue for other callers too. It looks like
> > __branch_check__() shouldn't be emitting ftrace_likely_update() calls
> > for noinstr functions...
> >
> > I have no idea how a macro is meant to check for function attributes,
> > though... :(
>
> Ignore it. It's the branch tracer enabled (that is, every "if ()" is being
> traced).
>
> Although I still use the branch profiler, I do not believe anyone uses the
> branch tracer. The branch profiler updates an array of counters that tells
> when the branch was true or false, the branch tracer actually traces
> (records an event) for every branch in the system!
\o/
> I think I'll just send a patch to nuke the tracer. I'm sure Peter Zijlstra
> will be happy when I do that. But I still want the profiler, as I find that
> useful.
It'll explode the moment Lai's entry rework goes through. That'll make
us run C code before we switch to the kernel address space, so your
counters will not exist/be-mapped and *BOOM*.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-05 8:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-04 12:22 vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: stackleak_erase()+0x35: call to ftrace_likely_update() leaves .noinstr.text section kernel test robot
2022-04-04 18:27 ` Kees Cook
2022-04-04 18:27 ` Kees Cook
2022-04-04 19:25 ` Steven Rostedt
2022-04-04 19:25 ` Steven Rostedt
2022-04-05 8:03 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2022-04-05 8:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-04-05 13:38 ` Steven Rostedt
2022-04-05 13:38 ` Steven Rostedt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220405080335.GC30877@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=kbuild-all@lists.01.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.