From: Julien Thierry <jthierry@redhat.com>
To: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jpoimboe@redhat.com,
peterz@infradead.org, mhelsley@vmware.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] objtool: orc_gen: Move orc_entry out of instruction structure
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 12:39:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3b79ffe8-dd5f-7356-ff1d-dc679ce304f7@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.21.2006051115020.10354@pobox.suse.cz>
Hi,
On 6/5/20 10:17 AM, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> Hi,
>
> a nit below...
>
> On Thu, 4 Jun 2020, Julien Thierry wrote:
>
>> One orc_entry is associated with each instruction in the object file,
>> but having the orc_entry contained by the instruction structure forces
>> architectures not implementing the orc subcommands to provide a dummy
>> definition of the orc_entry.
>>
>> Avoid that by having orc_entries in a separate list, part of the
>> objtool_file.
>
>> int create_orc(struct objtool_file *file)
>> {
>> struct instruction *insn;
>>
>> for_each_insn(file, insn) {
>> - struct orc_entry *orc = &insn->orc;
>> struct cfi_reg *cfa = &insn->cfi.cfa;
>> struct cfi_reg *bp = &insn->cfi.regs[CFI_BP];
>> + struct orc_entry *orc;
>> + struct orc_data *od;
>> +
>> + if (!insn->sec->text)
>> + continue;
>
> You have the same check added by the previous check a couple of lines
> below.
>
>> + od = calloc(1, sizeof(*od));
>> + if (!od)
>> + return -1;
>> + od->insn = insn;
>> + list_add_tail(&od->list, &file->orc_data_list);
>> +
>> + orc = &od->orc;
>>
>> if (!insn->sec->text)
>> continue;
>
> Here.
>
> The rest looks good to me, but I should probably check again with a
> clearer head.
>
Ah, I must have messed up the patch splitting/rebasing somewhere. Thanks
for pointing it out, this patch shouldn't add the check (but od
allocation should happen after the existing check). I'll fix that.
> Overall, the patch set is a nice improvement.
>
Thanks!
--
Julien Thierry
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-05 11:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-04 16:39 [PATCH 0/4] Remove dependency of check subcmd upon orc Julien Thierry
2020-06-04 16:39 ` [PATCH 1/4] objtool: Move object file loading out of check Julien Thierry
2020-06-04 16:39 ` [PATCH 2/4] objtool: Move orc outside " Julien Thierry
2020-06-04 16:39 ` [PATCH 3/4] objtool: orc: Skip setting orc_entry for non-text sections Julien Thierry
2020-06-04 16:39 ` [PATCH 4/4] objtool: orc_gen: Move orc_entry out of instruction structure Julien Thierry
2020-06-05 9:17 ` Miroslav Benes
2020-06-05 11:39 ` Julien Thierry [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3b79ffe8-dd5f-7356-ff1d-dc679ce304f7@redhat.com \
--to=jthierry@redhat.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbenes@suse.cz \
--cc=mhelsley@vmware.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome