* Sathvika Vasireddy <s...@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> Currently, decode_instructions() is failing if it is not able to find > instruction, and this is happening since commit dbcdbdfdf137b4 > ("objtool: Rework instruction -> symbol mapping") because it is > expecting instruction for STT_NOTYPE symbols. > > Due to this, the following objtool warnings are seen: > [1] arch/powerpc/kernel/optprobes_head.o: warning: objtool: > optprobe_template_end(): can't find starting instruction > [2] arch/powerpc/kernel/kvm_emul.o: warning: objtool: kvm_template_end(): > can't find starting instruction > [3] arch/powerpc/kernel/head_64.o: warning: objtool: end_first_256B(): can't > find starting instruction > > The warnings are thrown because find_insn() is failing for symbols that > are at the end of the file, or at the end of the section. Given how > STT_NOTYPE symbols are currently handled in decode_instructions(), > continue if the instruction is not found, instead of throwing warning > and returning. > > Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n....@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > Signed-off-by: Sathvika Vasireddy <s...@linux.ibm.com> The SOB chain doesn't look valid: is Naveen N. Rao, the first SOB line, the author of the patch? If yes then a matching From: line is needed. Or if two people developed the patch, then Co-developed-by should be used: Co-developed-by: First Co-Author <fi...@coauthor.example.org> Signed-off-by: First Co-Author <fi...@coauthor.example.org> Co-developed-by: Second Co-Author <sec...@coauthor.example.org> Signed-off-by: Second Co-Author <sec...@coauthor.example.org> [ In this SOB sequence "Second Co-Author" is the one who submits the patch. ] [ Please only use Co-developed-by if actual lines of code were written by the co-author that created copyrightable material - it's not a courtesy tag. Reviewed-by/Acked-by/Tested-by can be used to credit non-code contributions. ] Thanks, Ingo