Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 9 Jan 2023 18:12:47 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] objtool: continue if find_insn() fails in decode_instructions() | From | Sathvika Vasireddy <> |
| |
Hi Ingo, Happy New Year!
On 07/01/23 15:51, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Sathvika Vasireddy <sv@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.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >> Signed-off-by: Sathvika Vasireddy <sv@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 <first@coauthor.example.org> > Signed-off-by: First Co-Author <first@coauthor.example.org> > Co-developed-by: Second Co-Author <second@coauthor.example.org> > Signed-off-by: Second Co-Author <second@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. ] Thank you for the clarification, and for bringing these points to my attention. I'll keep these things in mind. In this case, since both Naveen N. Rao and I developed the patch, the below tags are applicable.
Co-developed-by: First Co-Author <first@coauthor.example.org> Signed-off-by: First Co-Author <first@coauthor.example.org> Co-developed-by: Second Co-Author <second@coauthor.example.org> Signed-off-by: Second Co-Author <second@coauthor.example.org>
However, I would be dropping this particular patch, since I think Nick's patch [1] is better to fix the objtool issue.
[1] - https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/20221220101323.3119939-1-npiggin@gmail.com/
Thanks for reviewing!
- Sathvika
| |