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 CF72F11CAB for ; Sat, 16 Mar 2024 11:01:48 +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=1710586908; cv=none; b=EahKg4ziZH6Ex6F3k/E3iF+slQfM+fJNdGzRRy3KAQXfcj1t1/+z7lypaZ40wOLORv34xJShyGSD/ynMsnwwk7Ku4Cdi+vYM4wsG5PgrZ5Es6MK0iNt40MqnIrgJ86fWaGCz5ZzZguLc+vWQ+VX7AWfQuqH4zvNjLl6dALzfTfI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710586908; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OvNTqygcBCOLg1Ap9q8QiVvQhNrX1wyL4+k8PsG7dKk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=MEiHyxtmymOydxMfxNZ+ei8XY2LX8v+1ppPCMm1QE62PsRI/OPZrYYSSfc0tDR5+/dc8YndNCL9H44wgR1i47kUmHAogZGE6nwR1UKxubTsSFnfTKIiL7n2wPXFi8JxNMOs0RLywiT5M6EkyA1NzZw7OKYZSW8HNmfPGTlrOgrQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=spZ/8M8R; 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="spZ/8M8R" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0E591C433F1; Sat, 16 Mar 2024 11:01:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1710586908; bh=OvNTqygcBCOLg1Ap9q8QiVvQhNrX1wyL4+k8PsG7dKk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=spZ/8M8RUPbqNN8iX07gTDXYJoJJBntSFWkgLowY2qvFM1YyoR5VLPOIDVGk34xAi vKWSI4iLK/z4KAOcwliflH1kSc/qs3/7vY1yylMcM6q4sIUmv0KkQGhGzuloJFmfc/ O+yNQVQBlk5YTyCifHLZV0LNlQFLRDPJmE3faqzktlDz8GZO2G/f8Fb4Mr6NNvkFDH KYptsvmnO6O/BtH8EcT7TxHw7wTQR9mEjHQrDRd/iJTQIukTkWB853YIG5tZDNs9Rx ByerlmWe/2HnPh33BY9wvQuCg//Bf2LHxp3lq8oz1q6GHfADO31i757IXLfrwE33TK PhF+JK68+MJSQ== Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2024 07:01:46 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , kernel-dev@igalia.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.15 0/5] Support static calls with LLVM-built kernels Message-ID: References: <20240313104255.1083365-1-cascardo@igalia.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 07:02:19AM -0300, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote: >On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 05:41:16AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 07:42:50AM -0300, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote: >> > Peter Zijlstra (4): >> > arch: Introduce CONFIG_FUNCTION_ALIGNMENT >> > x86/alternatives: Introduce int3_emulate_jcc() >> > x86/alternatives: Teach text_poke_bp() to patch Jcc.d32 instructions >> > x86/static_call: Add support for Jcc tail-calls >> > >> > Thomas Gleixner (1): >> > x86/asm: Differentiate between code and function alignment >> >> Is this not an issue on 6.1? I don't see d49a0626216b ("arch: Introduce >> CONFIG_FUNCTION_ALIGNMENT") in that tree. >> >> -- >> Thanks, >> Sasha > >The fix is really the last patch, 923510c88d2b ("x86/static_call: Add support >for Jcc tail-calls"). I see that 6.1 got 3,4,5: > >9d80f3e60043 x86/static_call: Add support for Jcc tail-calls >c51a456b4179 x86/alternatives: Teach text_poke_bp() to patch Jcc.d32 instructions >75c066485bcb x86/alternatives: Introduce int3_emulate_jcc() > >I can resubmit the series without the first two patches if that is preferred. I'm just curious why we needed the first two patches on 5.15 but not on 6.1. -- Thanks, Sasha