On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 11:59:12AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Is it only the static_call_sites entry itself that needs the
> alignment? Or do we end up depending on the static call function being
> at least 4-byte aligned too? The way it plays games with the key makes
> me worry.
The only
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 10:03 AM Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>
> Though instead of using objtool, it can be done in the module linker
> script:
This is obviously the way to go, but it raises another question: do we
guarantee that functions are aligned?
We actually have a couple of 32-bit x86
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 12:03:21PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 01:08:27PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 12:26:12PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > Ooooh, modules don't have this. They still have regular
> > > .static_call_sites sections, and
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 01:08:27PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 12:26:12PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Ooooh, modules don't have this. They still have regular
> > .static_call_sites sections, and *those* are unaligned.
> >
> > Section Headers:
> > [Nr] Name
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 13:08:27 +0100
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> So, anybody any opinion on if we ought to do this?
Looks fine to me.
-- Steve
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 12:26:12PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Ooooh, modules don't have this. They still have regular
> .static_call_sites sections, and *those* are unaligned.
>
> Section Headers:
> [Nr] Name TypeAddress OffSize ES Flg
> Lk Inf Al
>
>
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 12:10:10PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 09:33:45AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 01:15:25PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 8:40 AM Thomas Gleixner
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > - A fix for
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 09:33:45AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 01:15:25PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 8:40 AM Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > >
> > > - A fix for the static_call mechanism so it handles unaligned
> > >addresses correctly.
> >
On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 01:15:25PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 8:40 AM Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >
> > - A fix for the static_call mechanism so it handles unaligned
> >addresses correctly.
>
> I'm not disputing the fix in any way, but why weren't the relocation
>
The pull request you sent on Sun, 14 Mar 2021 15:39:56 -:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git
> locking-urgent-2021-03-14
has been merged into torvalds/linux.git:
https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/fa509ff879f816ce50800d20fc87564b69f53962
Thank you!
--
On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 8:40 AM Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> - A fix for the static_call mechanism so it handles unaligned
>addresses correctly.
I'm not disputing the fix in any way, but why weren't the relocation
info and function start addresses mutually aligned?
Are we perhaps missing
Linus,
please pull the latest locking/urgent branch from:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git
locking-urgent-2021-03-14
up to: 4817a52b3061: seqlock,lockdep: Fix seqcount_latch_init()
A couple of locking fixes:
- A fix for the static_call mechanism so it handles
12 matches
Mail list logo
