From: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] objtool: Add per-function rate limiting for unreachable warnings
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2023 11:07:44 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.21.2303281104010.14873@pobox.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b21f7791b30c54cf8c4d0f489decdc4a47a18963.1679932620.git.jpoimboe@kernel.org>
On Mon, 27 Mar 2023, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> Unreachable instruction warnings are rate limited to once per object
> file. That no longer makes sense for vmlinux validation, which might
> have other unreachable instructions lurking in other places. Change it
> to once per function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
> ---
> tools/objtool/check.c | 4 ++++
> tools/objtool/include/objtool/elf.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/objtool/check.c b/tools/objtool/check.c
> index 73dd091c0075..67a684225702 100644
> --- a/tools/objtool/check.c
> +++ b/tools/objtool/check.c
> @@ -4557,6 +4557,10 @@ static int validate_reachable_instructions(struct objtool_file *file)
> if (insn->visited || ignore_unreachable_insn(file, insn))
> continue;
>
> + if (insn->sym->warned)
> + continue;
> + insn->sym->warned = 1;
> +
Ok
> WARN_FUNC("unreachable instruction", insn->sec, insn->offset);
> return 1;
But we still return here when an unreachable instruction is encountered
and warned about. Or maybe I am just misunderstanding the purpose.
If not, would it be better to just collect the number of warnings per
object as we do elsewhere?
warnings++;
and then at the end
return warnings;
Miroslav
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-28 9:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-27 16:00 [PATCH 0/5] objtool: warning improvements Josh Poimboeuf
2023-03-27 16:00 ` [PATCH 1/5] objtool: Add '--verbose' option for disassembling affected functions Josh Poimboeuf
2023-03-28 8:47 ` Miroslav Benes
2023-03-27 16:00 ` [PATCH 2/5] objtool: Combine '--backtrace' with '--verbose' Josh Poimboeuf
2023-03-28 8:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-28 20:19 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2023-03-29 7:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-27 16:00 ` [PATCH 3/5] objtool: Remove superfluous dead_end_function() check Josh Poimboeuf
2023-03-27 16:00 ` [PATCH 4/5] objtool: Add per-function rate limiting for unreachable warnings Josh Poimboeuf
2023-03-28 8:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-28 20:22 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2023-03-29 7:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-28 9:07 ` Miroslav Benes [this message]
2023-03-27 16:00 ` [PATCH 5/5] objtool: Add "missing __noreturn" warning Josh Poimboeuf
2023-03-28 9:10 ` Miroslav Benes
2023-03-29 16:24 ` Josh Poimboeuf
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=alpine.LSU.2.21.2303281104010.14873@pobox.suse.cz \
--to=mbenes@suse.cz \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®