From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C68E3A7F52 for ; Fri, 22 May 2026 11:58:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779451126; cv=none; b=gUqADMK42f8k1IiCYEC3Z0ZiID2vC3U8kBYVaCW2DBMXmJYJrwJhsn/r8FomT7DQuTQu02Flhu34Rf1RyHfAbIGup9h9Soa9c17T1KWvRPz/caeTFBQTOpLlYDd/3GHjKr7dxtSOCsqTIJ2s11p6sUBj6Jia68xShbGYxkYZYGg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779451126; c=relaxed/simple; bh=baWQd869kABE+Oa89yUYbABf7JIao/y9EAWjEn7++FQ=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=P4aMzwYN2zO4pCuXdGiM7Sw8X3AbZayNP2zbogM9WjfJbnbntxQMR0ZePOlQzGb/5ROOl1lDBFFp8Tbc3FApepeYNrB/2fcZjj0q/GLB96KjHYsdzhN51JiKS1v8twgo1aOpXvm90Pubj2nOmb44N8lxe+zJSLPhrkLAyWbo4uE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Uk/1By+j; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="Uk/1By+j" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9BEEB1F000E9; Fri, 22 May 2026 11:58:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1779451125; bh=+X4n6/TNzZj928yYOtEkLpVa/BPj0z3bxMjKHzo0cDE=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=Uk/1By+jAVGKCajJl9J7qfKtyCOw85lmv2SqujPWtXaEUT9BZLA5i5VvAp3JnAGva DQ8tOOS1ZgJNvox3cTkbGJQB/LS/HxAKFnzJckqFF/KsFqWTfLyVYvynT+D2YeMDst ZA8PjLtmWs8mWjI7swBddu4PiejVuJhXcfkaUtGmr8uMkPgE6Zr3sIB0qS9GoSgVfN O1CLiya/MknV/PYXDZYm8v6R4d8nI4FraKspqgo7J8lZGmrfgyBe+5tzBERhLHJmjI PiUSbgnk6FgnZan5DKHdPPspKF22CGaSIuSsNUwD2iW2idrXSaE/7AaRGB3G+xQHG0 OYXDaKU9BE5Lg== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 3/6] x86/asm: Use CFI_* macros in SYM_FUNC_* macros so they can be added to VDSO Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Jens Remus" Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260522110427.2816637-4-jremus@linux.ibm.com> References: <20260522110427.2816637-4-jremus@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 22 May 2026 11:58:44 +0000 Message-Id: <20260522115844.9BEEB1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Low] The `__CFI_TYPE` macro in `arch/x86/include/asm/linkage.h` creates = unbalanced CFI directives because it uses `SYM_START` but closes with `SYM_= FUNC_END`. -- commit 2769cdf2ca16b1b56aace01ab1acf0951b91be1f Author: Josh Poimboeuf x86/asm: Use CFI_* macros in SYM_FUNC_* macros so they can be added to VDSO This commit adds CFI_STARTPROC and CFI_ENDPROC annotations to the SYM_FUNC_* macros. This allows VDSO asm functions to avoid adding them manually, while leaving the macros empty for the kernel proper. > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/linkage.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/linkag= e.h > index a7294656ad908..c2ca8117376fb 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/linkage.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/linkage.h > @@ -112,34 +116,51 @@ > # define SYM_FUNC_ALIAS_MEMFUNC SYM_FUNC_ALIAS > #endif > =20 > +#define __SYM_FUNC_START \ > + CFI_STARTPROC ASM_NL > + > +#define __SYM_FUNC_END \ > + CFI_ENDPROC ASM_NL [ ... ] > +#define SYM_FUNC_END(name) \ > + __SYM_FUNC_END \ > + SYM_END(name, SYM_T_FUNC) [Severity: Low] Does this change to SYM_FUNC_END() create unbalanced CFI directives when used with __CFI_TYPE()? The __CFI_TYPE() macro is defined earlier in this file to expand to a block that starts with SYM_START() and ends with SYM_FUNC_END(): #define __CFI_TYPE(name) \ SYM_START(__cfi_##name, SYM_L_LOCAL, SYM_A_NONE) \ ... \ SYM_FUNC_END(__cfi_##name) Because SYM_START() does not emit CFI_STARTPROC (unlike SYM_FUNC_START()), code expanding __CFI_TYPE() will now emit a CFI_ENDPROC directive without a corresponding CFI_STARTPROC. While this might not break the build today since CFI_ENDPROC evaluates to an empty nocfi macro outside VDSO and __CFI_TYPE() is not used in VDSO code, will this cause issues if KCFI or typed symbols are ever used in VDSO build= s? Should __CFI_TYPE() pair SYM_START() with SYM_END() instead? --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260522110427.2816= 637-1-jremus@linux.ibm.com?part=3D3