From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 309D3C5479D for ; Mon, 9 Jan 2023 16:54:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4NrKlz3XVDz3cKb for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2023 03:54:07 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=mZKdUV+Q; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::429; helo=mail-wr1-x429.google.com; envelope-from=mingo.kernel.org@gmail.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=mZKdUV+Q; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-wr1-x429.google.com (mail-wr1-x429.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::429]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4NrKky3GPsz3bT4 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2023 03:53:12 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x429.google.com with SMTP id az7so8844740wrb.5 for ; Mon, 09 Jan 2023 08:53:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:sender :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=I6M2f+5hl6ycxEpjBTo7pStxA/gUi5ADO0lMaKR9JFY=; b=mZKdUV+QJVvlJnUlNUoT/kQoNbhSpp8TKFDoQbtzA9ccRgsHV1ngpLYb+wD3q5+qZI xdkaS/XCfHHymFPKkFxH55jQh13D+9YuCtBsLlRcFut0+UeE6MZg6MkPf+nsZM7x3EYG 7HPnbDHTVZ3GNtS7maefT3yS7dDK02BGF/HUwkhM5UYokRVLzn53LGx3ruNNSMvPEqry kfOPqTD5VgBnnV9ZjKTkyTot51lduB7tUvTh4ZSeiU3r1eVROkloGQDmm+uCRDJE5dsk XjqqXsahAqBRoeV9juBgLUiOMGnHu/riQCeclPMP3eJd3DUG6gX4xGoJsAV2A5j2Gnh+ r5wA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:sender :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=I6M2f+5hl6ycxEpjBTo7pStxA/gUi5ADO0lMaKR9JFY=; b=Hr9Ag0I3WLtvQWHjrXR8OJjsHonNloLruYU+sFKDCWgbnASagfbpi8ZNQ9CBQzWmZw bPqKeNr3bKAJfl34VFsYPkbf3Z5cu3CNfC6nLrm1iXuDgxtth7p9xP4NgCUrj7Ef/bNc Gagb47ZKXtqE8EgqoS05wXyVT2+GMzKorCKjIU32tvkIFdcfMOyKDF9Bz3uukRX3+9gV 0N3nCPsSRNylcvF2BPofGxwzuWJb3K42nAmPnPwpfXeZtuFoKnY155gCvFOjIa9uVwrR 8W8X7v2bLt48gCrs8rc7uZfNv/34SQ5KG3yn569JuFWSJdWyqT2AgmAW4s3SBwk/SAzn rfvQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2kpNyxI3DZm52Iz/3T6atycHANqKvk5x3XJkzerHUpBxbrpPNagQ aJbmR8WB3WQscvqWqCb7wIY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXsJJiszUF3JuTTX8Nmf8vVy4QgNmyu5UjoEDDbrHTlDop789Gmv81KRUfztvkaV2pEktbZHlA== X-Received: by 2002:adf:e3d2:0:b0:299:51c8:5297 with SMTP id k18-20020adfe3d2000000b0029951c85297mr17551617wrm.66.1673283189102; Mon, 09 Jan 2023 08:53:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from gmail.com ([31.46.247.25]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bp28-20020a5d5a9c000000b00273cd321a1bsm9058068wrb.107.2023.01.09.08.53.07 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 09 Jan 2023 08:53:08 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2023 17:53:04 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Sathvika Vasireddy Subject: Re: [PATCH] objtool: continue if find_insn() fails in decode_instructions() Message-ID: References: <20221208072813.25799-1-sv@linux.ibm.com> <623307fe-a29a-c691-b07b-4d2168d4bdcc@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <623307fe-a29a-c691-b07b-4d2168d4bdcc@linux.ibm.com> X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: sfr@canb.auug.org.au, peterz@infradead.org, chenzhongjin@huawei.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aik@ozlabs.ru, mingo@redhat.com, npiggin@gmail.com, jpoimboe@redhat.com, naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com, mbenes@suse.cz, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" * Sathvika Vasireddy wrote: > Hi Ingo, Happy New Year! Happy New Year to you too! :-) > On 07/01/23 15:51, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Sathvika Vasireddy wrote: > > > > > Currently, decode_instructions() is failing if it is not able to find > > > instruction, and this is happening since commit dbcdbdfdf137b4 > > > ("objtool: Rework instruction -> symbol mapping") because it is > > > expecting instruction for STT_NOTYPE symbols. > > > > > > Due to this, the following objtool warnings are seen: > > > [1] arch/powerpc/kernel/optprobes_head.o: warning: objtool: optprobe_template_end(): can't find starting instruction > > > [2] arch/powerpc/kernel/kvm_emul.o: warning: objtool: kvm_template_end(): can't find starting instruction > > > [3] arch/powerpc/kernel/head_64.o: warning: objtool: end_first_256B(): can't find starting instruction > > > > > > The warnings are thrown because find_insn() is failing for symbols that > > > are at the end of the file, or at the end of the section. Given how > > > STT_NOTYPE symbols are currently handled in decode_instructions(), > > > continue if the instruction is not found, instead of throwing warning > > > and returning. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao > > > Signed-off-by: Sathvika Vasireddy > > The SOB chain doesn't look valid: is Naveen N. Rao, the first SOB line, the > > author of the patch? If yes then a matching From: line is needed. > > > > Or if two people developed the patch, then Co-developed-by should be used: > > > > Co-developed-by: First Co-Author > > Signed-off-by: First Co-Author > > Co-developed-by: Second Co-Author > > Signed-off-by: Second Co-Author > > > > [ In this SOB sequence "Second Co-Author" is the one who submits the patch. ] > > > > [ Please only use Co-developed-by if actual lines of code were written by > > the co-author that created copyrightable material - it's not a courtesy > > tag. Reviewed-by/Acked-by/Tested-by can be used to credit non-code > > contributions. ] > Thank you for the clarification, and for bringing these points to my > attention. I'll keep these things in mind. In this case, since both Naveen > N. Rao and I developed the patch, the below tags > are applicable. > >         Co-developed-by: First Co-Author >         Signed-off-by: First Co-Author >         Co-developed-by: Second Co-Author >         Signed-off-by: Second Co-Author ... while filling in your real names & email addresses I suppose. ;-) > > However, I would be dropping this particular patch, since I think Nick's > patch [1] is better to fix the objtool issue. > > [1] - https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/20221220101323.3119939-1-npiggin@gmail.com/ Ok, I'll pick up Nick's fix, with these tags added for the PowerPC regression aspect and your review: Reported-by: Naveen N. Rao Reported-by: Sathvika Vasireddy Acked-by: Sathvika Vasireddy To document & credit the efforts of your patch. Thanks, Ingo