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;
Sender: Arvind Sankar <niveditas98@gmail.com>
From:   Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>
Date:   Tue, 27 Oct 2020 16:00:33 -0400
To:     Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Cc:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
        Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>,
        Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>,
        Linux-Arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 13/29] arm64/build: Assert for unwanted sections
Message-ID: <20201027200033.GA1826217@rani.riverdale.lan>
References: <20200821194310.3089815-1-keescook@chromium.org>
 <20200821194310.3089815-14-keescook@chromium.org>
 <CAMuHMdUg0WJHEcq6to0-eODpXPOywLot6UD2=GFHpzoj_hCoBQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMuHMdUw9KwC=EVB60yjg7mA7Fg-efOiKE7577p+uEdGJVS2OQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMuHMdUJFEt3LxWHk73AsLDGhjzBvJGAML76UAxeGzb4zOf96w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMj1kXHXk3BX6mz6X_03sj_pSLj9Ck-=1S57tV3__N9JQOcDEw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMuHMdV4jKccjKkoj38EFC-5yN99pBvthFyrX81EG4GpassZwA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKwvOdkq3ZwW+FEui1Wtj_dWBevi0Mrt4fHa4oiMZTUZKOMi3g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMuHMdUDOzJbzf=0jom9dnSzkC+dkMdkyY_BOBMAivbJfF+Gmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMj1kXEw+6Srqd5w9oxpik3VUbehapx_TcHLDCbmHZBSdY768Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAMj1kXEw+6Srqd5w9oxpik3VUbehapx_TcHLDCbmHZBSdY768Q@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 08:33:00PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2020 at 20:25, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > When I see .eh_frame, I think -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables is
> > > missing from someone's KBUILD_CFLAGS.
> > > But I don't see anything curious in kernel/bpf/Makefile, unless
> > > cc-disable-warning is somehow broken.
> >
> > I tracked it down to kernel/bpf/core.c:___bpf_prog_run() being tagged
> > with __no_fgcse aka __attribute__((optimize("-fno-gcse"))).
> >
> > Even if the function is trivially empty ("return 0;"), a ".eh_frame" section
> > is generated.  Removing the __no_fgcse tag fixes that.
> >
> 
> 
> Given that it was added for issues related to retpolines, ORC and
> objtool, it should be safe to make that annotation x86-only.

The optimize attribute is not meant for production use. I had mentioned
this at the time but it got lost: the optimize attribute apparently does
not add options, it replaces them completely. So I'm guessing this one
is dropping the -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables and causing the eh_frame
sections, though I don't know why that doesn't cause eh_frame on x86?

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/alpine.LSU.2.21.2004151445520.11688@wotan.suse.de/