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;
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To:     'Peter Zijlstra' <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
CC:     Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "mark.rutland@arm.com" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        "dvyukov@google.com" <dvyukov@google.com>,
        "seanjc@google.com" <seanjc@google.com>,
        "pbonzini@redhat.com" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        "mbenes@suse.cz" <mbenes@suse.cz>,
        "llvm@lists.linux.dev" <llvm@lists.linux.dev>,
        "linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org" <linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 20/22] x86,word-at-a-time: Remove .fixup usage
Thread-Topic: [PATCH 20/22] x86,word-at-a-time: Remove .fixup usage
Thread-Index: AQHX1a3cTPOCK2YRr06RWvi0T9RbLav8lJ+g
Date:   Wed, 10 Nov 2021 10:46:42 +0000
Message-ID: <f6dbe42651e84278b44e44ed7d0ed74f@AcuMS.aculab.com>
References: <20211105171023.989862879@infradead.org>
 <20211105171821.654356149@infradead.org>
 <20211108164711.mr2cqdcvedin2lvx@treble>
 <YYlshkTmf5zdvf1Q@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CAKwvOdkFZ4PSN0GGmKMmoCrcp7_VVNjau_b0sNRm3MuqVi8yow@mail.gmail.com>
 <YYov8SVHk/ZpFsUn@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CAKwvOdn8yrRopXyfd299=SwZS9TAPfPj4apYgdCnzPb20knhbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20211109210736.GV174703@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
In-Reply-To: <20211109210736.GV174703@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Precedence: bulk

From: Peter Zijlstra
> Sent: 09 November 2021 21:08
...
> 
> GCC does the same, but I wanted to have the exception stuff be in
> .text.cold, but alas it doesn't do that. I left the attribute because of
> it's descriptive value.
> 
> >  Unless the cold attribute is helping move
> > ("shrink-wrap"?) the basic block to a whole other section
> > (.text.cold.)?
> 
> I was hoping it would do that, but it doesn't on gcc-11.

Wouldn't moving part of a function to .text.cold (or .text.unlikely)
generate the same problems with the stack backtrace code as the
.text.fixup section you are removing had??

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)