public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] objtool fixes and updates
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2025 09:58:38 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z-ucroZoh3TgtQxA@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ttv3iy3i57mvmkdp2mwh4cjwk3qx5eoyr7zmgjl5beohfxvwar@4na7dgto7r6m>


* Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 30, 2025 at 06:39:51PM -0700, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 01:13:55AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > On Sun, Mar 30, 2025 at 03:19:40PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 29 Mar 2025 at 08:33, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Btw, test bot complains:
> > > > >
> > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/r/202503292202.Sge7ZEUc-lkp@intel.com
> > > > 
> > > > That's not a very helpful error message
> > > 
> > > I found this:
> > > 
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/r/202503280703.OARM8SrY-lkp@intel.com
> > > 
> > > which looks like the original report.
> > > 
> > > Looks unsolved yet...
> > 
> > The "new" warning is just the "skipping duplicate warning", which was
> > already merged with commit 0a7fb6f07e3a ("objtool: Increase per-function
> > WARN_FUNC() rate limit").  So none of the warnings are specific to this
> > pull request.
> > 
> > Tiezhu, can you please look at this warning?
> >   
> >    arch/loongarch/kernel/traps.o: warning: objtool: show_stack+0xe0: stack state mismatch: reg1[22]=-1+0 reg2[22]=-2-160
> >    arch/loongarch/kernel/traps.o: warning: objtool: show_stack+0xe0: stack state mismatch: reg1[23]=-1+0 reg2[23]=-2-152
> 
> Here's a fix.  Will post a real fix soon, along with another pile of 
> fixes.

And just to make it clear, these objtool warnings were not a new 
regression, they were introduced more than a year ago, via:

  cb8a2ef0848c ("LoongArch: Add ORC stack unwinder support")

So, to bring this thread to a conclusion, I think by getting rid of the 
summary warning line:

  c5610071a69d ("Revert "objtool: Increase per-function WARN_FUNC() rate limit"")

... the CI test-bots ought to be back to the v6.14 baseline even taking 
such false positives into account.

I'll send the updated objtool/urgent tree to Linus later today, unless 
some last-minute problem pops up.

Thanks,

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2025-04-01  7:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-03-28 21:18 [GIT PULL] objtool fixes and updates Ingo Molnar
2025-03-29 15:32 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-03-30 22:19   ` Linus Torvalds
2025-03-30 23:13     ` Borislav Petkov
2025-03-31  1:39       ` Josh Poimboeuf
2025-03-31  9:39         ` Ingo Molnar
2025-03-31 15:29           ` Josh Poimboeuf
2025-03-31 16:07             ` Ingo Molnar
2025-03-31 22:19         ` Josh Poimboeuf
2025-04-01  7:58           ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2025-03-31 11:55   ` Ingo Molnar
2025-03-31 12:31     ` Philip Li
2025-03-31 12:36       ` Borislav Petkov
2025-03-31 12:44         ` Philip Li
2025-03-31 12:49           ` Borislav Petkov
2025-03-31 13:27             ` Philip Li
2025-03-31 16:10       ` Ingo Molnar
2025-03-31 22:17         ` Josh Poimboeuf
2025-04-01  0:38           ` Philip Li
2025-04-01  2:05             ` Tiezhu Yang
2025-04-01  4:15               ` Josh Poimboeuf
2025-04-01  6:12                 ` Tiezhu Yang
2025-04-02 17:48 ` pr-tracker-bot

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=Z-ucroZoh3TgtQxA@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=yangtiezhu@loongson.cn \
    /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