From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 676721D798E for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2025 09:40:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738575649; cv=none; b=VYvq8OrCYIMRI0rwElRG8VhWPJTEVWvh+CKDmhMU/oworZdb7IsskONXl+I22MGkjXH9MRMWIwdHJX6DEUkyHh31+GscPrgorMkdGUnXdprHR0yElEBti1W6a8X1kSc76hlR4tDDQVANQ6nMagKEj0iziNGgITbPW2jlaXqXGn8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738575649; c=relaxed/simple; bh=yLSfCwtDFL9/kwjAl+TQSWLN4kcDC05ZHSjanwhfXu0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=FsDZO7rbLTXGrej6ht3wdCIJ4ogkSH/FWSBHt1gsD7OYxL35fX91+HZ2DeXzrcB4SHkMbntBluKDjDnEwqplY1p4Jg+egkScGAgew7AhZGVTxdJPZgAOquwLcl0AtnwvB4MMu9lmiMoKTqJV5NpmRBqIrCZ+wVh6o+bMgy5zchU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=B0df3y5d; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="B0df3y5d" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1A63DC4CED2; Mon, 3 Feb 2025 09:40:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1738575648; bh=yLSfCwtDFL9/kwjAl+TQSWLN4kcDC05ZHSjanwhfXu0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=B0df3y5d7oa1AzCmf1U7aQfWk/NiZFIehMMGU6NL2ENewTzMrfIF5wDFPTXDd6RlW kyfZuw/ui6VH4DHqGaqu3NuLuYCBcdRP145i/lVNf4toPqP4a0Ogz8KY3Gp4Ob5jkb TyoeaJzH9P3syhWy0TSHcM/FCvrB/LNJ2Rwk7OTnscI3IQAwJb5Ptl228UNebWpEIm CvwSF9AfwNPAGhBAupH1DkQPuA6yAfaqdlf6zJqkW/z7AOIDcYDwONW2KOVOMfnZDv tFX52XqphZIQfgwoppIfhnQj5IWpR7wkFQiINKq70TG/Y016jJn9Dd2/am7cTqzM2L KLT4I14L/TB3g== Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2025 10:40:38 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ard Biesheuvel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, Tom Lendacky , Nathan Chancellor Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] x86/relocs: Improve diagnostic for rejected absolute references Message-ID: References: <20250127114334.1045857-4-ardb+git@google.com> <20250127114334.1045857-5-ardb+git@google.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: * Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 at 17:57, Linus Torvalds > wrote: > > > > On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 at 03:43, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > > > > > Absolute reference to symbol '.rodata+0x180' detected in .head.text (0xffffffff820cb4ba). > > > > Do we have any symbol name lookup logic anywhere? > > > > I can look into that. In this particular case, though, there is no > symbol to look up as it is a anonymous jump table generated by the > compiler. And the function name would be inaccurate too, as > snp_cpuid_postprocess() got inlined into its caller. But I guess with > the right DWARF data, at least the call site could be narrowed down a > bit better. So patch #2 is now upstream, but should I apply this diagnostic patch as-is, or will there be a -v2? Thanks, Ingo