Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 19 Dec 2018 10:54:28 -0600
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To:     Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>
Cc:     yamada.masahiro@socionext.com, michal.lkml@markovi.net,
        jeyu@kernel.org, jikos@kernel.org, pmladek@suse.com,
        linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, live-patching@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kbuild: use -flive-patching when CONFIG_LIVEPATCH is
 enabled
Message-ID: <20181219165428.5udrppedpdvf2u7k@treble>
References: <20181219141744.32392-1-mbenes@suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20181219141744.32392-1-mbenes@suse.cz>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 03:17:44PM +0100, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> GCC 9 introduces a new option, -flive-patching. It disables certain
> optimizations which could make a compilation unsafe for later live
> patching of the running kernel.
> 
> The option is used only if CONFIG_LIVEPATCH is enabled and $(CC)
> supports it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>
> ---
>  Makefile | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
> index a0650bf79606..53f5ab810efe 100644
> --- a/Makefile
> +++ b/Makefile
> @@ -778,6 +778,10 @@ KBUILD_CFLAGS_KERNEL	+= $(call cc-option,-ffunction-sections,)
>  KBUILD_CFLAGS_KERNEL	+= $(call cc-option,-fdata-sections,)
>  endif
>  
> +ifdef CONFIG_LIVEPATCH
> +KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-option, -flive-patching=inline-clone)
> +endif
> +
>  # arch Makefile may override CC so keep this after arch Makefile is included
>  NOSTDINC_FLAGS += -nostdinc -isystem $(shell $(CC) -print-file-name=include)


This option only makes sense for source-based patch generation, so isn't
it a bit premature to make this change without proper source-based patch
tooling?

Also the commit message needs an analysis of the performance impacts.

-- 
Josh