On Mon, 24 May 2021 at 10:03, Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> wrote: > On 5/21/21 2:39 PM, Marco Elver wrote: > > On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 10:50AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote: > >> On 5/20/21 12:55 PM, Marco Elver wrote: > >>> I think this came up with other no_sanitize [1] based on what I had > >>> written to you last year [2]. > >>> > >>> [1]https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-June/547618.html > >>> [2]https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/canpmjnnrz5ovkb6pe7k6gjfogbht_zhypkng9ad+kjndzk7...@mail.gmail.com/ > >> > >> Ah, you're right. I've just updated the patch to address that. > >> > >> Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests. > >> > >> Ready to be installed? > > > > Looks good, I also just built a kernel with the no_sanitize_coverage > > attribute (without the objtool nop-workaround) and works as expected. > > Good, thanks! > > > > > Not sure if required, but would such an additional test be useful: > > Yes, it is, thanks for it. [...] > > Otherwise, please go ahead. I assume this is targeting GCC 12? > > Yep. > > There's V3 I'm sending. > > Ready for master?
>From my side this looks good. Thank you! -- Marco
