On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 03:38:02PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Josh Poimboeuf <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 02:22:34PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >> ... > >> > >> 0000000000000000 <put_cred_rcu.cold.1>: > >> 0: e8 00 00 00 00 callq 5 <put_cred_rcu.cold.1+0x5> > >> 1: R_X86_64_PC32 > >> __sanitizer_cov_trace_pc-0x4 > >> 5: 44 8b 8b 64 ff ff ff mov -0x9c(%rbx),%r9d > >> c: 48 8b 8b 68 ff ff ff mov -0x98(%rbx),%rcx > >> 13: 44 89 e2 mov %r12d,%edx > >> 16: 44 8b 83 60 ff ff ff mov -0xa0(%rbx),%r8d > >> 1d: 4c 89 ee mov %r13,%rsi > >> 20: 48 c7 c7 00 00 00 00 mov $0x0,%rdi > >> 23: R_X86_64_32S .rodata.str1.8+0x28 > >> 27: e8 00 00 00 00 callq 2c <__kstrtab_creds_are_invalid+0x3> > >> 28: R_X86_64_PC32 panic-0x4 > > > > Thanks. Can you send me one of the .o files? > > Attached here now.
Ok, looks like I'll need to add support for this new pattern (jumping to a .cold section in .text.unlikely). I'm also about to start work on fixing that other issue you found with GCC's inefficient update of the stack pointer. I really appreciate your finding all these warnings (and getting advance GCC 8 testing). Thanks again! -- Josh
