From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Cc: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Changbin Du <changbin.du@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kbuild: Remove CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 10:30:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220420173025.iobbcym4ff6nfapg@treble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKwvOdmfUDZPyhtF5fvdKy7i-qRKB7Bmq80DhP0F=yarG+rnpw@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 10:03:18AM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > > If the issues are all about objtool,
> > > "depends on !STACK_VALIDATION" might be
> > > an alternative approach?
> > >
> > > config DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH
> > > bool "Enable full Section mismatch analysis"
> > > depends on CC_IS_GCC
> > > depends on !STACK_VALIDATION # do not confuse objtool
> >
> > Yes, that would be another way to handle it. Though that means the
> > option would effectively be dead on x86-64.
>
> Does this series help (or is it related to this thread)?
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1650300597.git.jpoimboe@redhat.com/
> Patch 17/25 seems to make STACK_VALIDATION unwinder-dependent (on
> CONFIG_UNWINDER_FRAME_POINTER)?
Not really, that series just splits objtool into more granular features,
so objtool is no longer just equivalent to CONFIG_STACK_VALIDATION. So
the above suggestion would probably need to be changed to something like
depends on !HAVE_UACCESS_VALIDATION
Or maybe
depends on !(HAVE_UACCESS_VALIDATION || NOINSTR_VALIDATION)
But uaccess validation is still mandatory for x86-64, so that would
still unconditionally disable CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH for x86-64.
--
Josh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-20 17:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-08 16:21 [PATCH] kbuild: Remove CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH Josh Poimboeuf
2022-04-08 18:29 ` Masahiro Yamada
2022-04-08 19:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-04-08 20:08 ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-04-08 20:16 ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-04-08 20:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-04-08 20:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-04-09 10:33 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-04-09 0:48 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-04-20 17:03 ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-04-20 17:30 ` Josh Poimboeuf [this message]
2022-04-08 20:27 ` Nick Desaulniers
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=20220420173025.iobbcym4ff6nfapg@treble \
--to=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=changbin.du@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
--cc=michal.lkml@markovi.net \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox