Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:a852:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id d18csp734503pxy; Wed, 5 May 2021 12:29:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxSot3ZYPeEUN801MGntB1MAy7iiYl4muWbQUqyPyqidjdC85d7N+HNP/9IYRS9mttK3RPk X-Received: by 2002:a65:6a4c:: with SMTP id o12mr442143pgu.371.1620242956838; Wed, 05 May 2021 12:29:16 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1620242956; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Vzdy+UckuDPk2QYZuBQQ7RqlpPD4RY9IA2zb3ZkLrMkONHMtQgGvIbvYoMJIUm3r0W EVMZ8qQzznbczzKeze6l+vOLhik9UrffHZ4+/akyy2vzimhoseavp3ftThbcDQFUzNze uQL3+hmEvHU6zZGgvMpadyJjNTcGox9x1P4UDhyvikNc6gg9RQKvE8cmC3VRIAYy79Y5 ak3NKBUvqlJNZMtpwaJQ9a5TmKONsIKP2hb+ZQBREcYPw4SflXXFzN7PNtr5tert0Mbc N6ZmvfKj65FUoy7OVLYz1+oeQ2OqHOTkvU12qboPbQnl4fKtHLsI35O95W2fi2SmQCjr QOAA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:ironport-sdr :ironport-sdr; bh=bWo9niyhNeMmGdJsv0J4im1Pj2hzl/4H1j4ctcjJuMM=; b=V4rRlkHqZwIAKd1blMi0pDX8Qh7ln8i+wOGwHX7WB/lkRHxAeO50RAIDAsQzQkfzdX e+HhOK1Oel+KHBWRGRS7A3YdqYqfzypjsaoBnl8YGYBHlT4Qe+9rZY4S+gnax2yz61Jw BsbgqWrjnoE8f3VkQRqFC7ACKXe6dbfToD2x4q9ql5rmr83Z30TFF6ss6M759NAe4eja E4bVkg/oPi4efWdXgUAcTyIgRV3crFTjj0zW8G5MiBFBPKqKiL3K/gNaZrmwU129XT+S TWwVLJnvT2HlpqiWeeQXtQRwvmrt9fBgEGAJXPd/BwgUPrEEV9t7D0O5O6iFZlWYzQe6 O6qg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id s19si66847pfu.44.2021.05.05.12.29.03; Wed, 05 May 2021 12:29:16 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232925AbhEEOfp (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 5 May 2021 10:35:45 -0400 Received: from mga05.intel.com ([192.55.52.43]:40976 "EHLO mga05.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229763AbhEEOfm (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 May 2021 10:35:42 -0400 IronPort-SDR: gBM/ZxI60QbQQWNLOPKQjJryURnBABog0/hPRwzaP0KXbJISIt9yq2K326wXtBDsPrs1eoR+kC T7aiVzwKWyYg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,9975"; a="283648490" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.82,275,1613462400"; d="scan'208";a="283648490" Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by fmsmga105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 May 2021 07:34:44 -0700 IronPort-SDR: DrKoOWa5eJeqAiNbrQBDhagwD7L0gMC68nrfbJKLatMj5DI+/j4uq9ePLhp2EllddUoVIycVHu 7WJnpOjDgHiQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.82,275,1613462400"; d="scan'208";a="433848058" Received: from tassilo.jf.intel.com ([10.54.74.11]) by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 May 2021 07:34:43 -0700 Date: Wed, 5 May 2021 07:34:42 -0700 From: Andi Kleen To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen , linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Work around undefined behavior in sched class checking Message-ID: <20210505143442.GR4032392@tassilo.jf.intel.com> References: <20210505033945.1282851-1-ak@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > Use RELOC_HIDE to make this work. This hides the symbols from gcc, > > so the optimizer won't make these assumption. I also split > > the BUG_ONs in multiple. > > Urgh, that insanity again :/ Can't we pretty please get a GCC flag to > disable that? Even if that was done (I could totally see the gcc people pushing back on this; why should they add special flags just for Linux developers not understanding ISO-C?) you would still need the fix for already shipping compilers. -Andi