Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 4 Sep 2020 13:55:25 -0500
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To:     Julien Thierry <jthierry@redhat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, mbenes@suse.cz,
        raphael.gault@arm.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/10] Make check implementation arch agnostic
Message-ID: <20200904185525.zkx46hsbobghr2wb@treble>
References: <20200904153028.32676-1-jthierry@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200904153028.32676-1-jthierry@redhat.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 04:30:18PM +0100, Julien Thierry wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> The current implementation of the check subcommand has various x86 bits
> here and there. In order to prepare objtool to provide check for other
> architectures, add some abstraction over the x86 specific bits, relying
> on objtool arch specific code to provide some necessary operations.
> 
> This is part of the effort to implement check for arm64, initiated [1]
> by Raphael. The series is based on top of the separation of check & orc
> subcommands series[2].
> 
> I've push both series base on top of tip/objtool/core at [3].
> 
> - The first two patches make it simpler for new arches to provide their
> list of kernel headers, without worrying about modifications in the x86
> headers.
> - Patch 3 Moves arch specific macros to more suitable location
> - Patches 4 and 5 add abstraction to handle alternatives
> - Patch 6 adds abstraction to handle jump table
> - Patches 7-10 makes unwind hint definitions shared across architectures
> 
> Changes since v2 [4]:
> - Rebased on v5.9-rc1
> - Under tools/objtool/arch/x86/, rename arch_special.c to special.c
> - Rename include/linux/frame.h to inclide/linux/objtool.h
> - Share unwind hint types across architectures

Thanks.  These look good.  We're still trying to get our merge process
worked out, and tip/objtool/core is now pretty old, but these apply well
enough.

If there are no more comments I can fix up the few minor comments I had
and then try to get them merged after your other set (once Peter and I
figure out how to do that :-)

-- 
Josh