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:   Tue, 18 Jan 2022 15:01:20 -0800
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>,
        x86@kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev, linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] objtool: prefer memory clobber & %= to volatile &
 __COUNTER__
Message-ID: <20220118230120.pivvson7qekfiqic@treble>
References: <20220114010526.1776605-1-ndesaulniers@google.com>
 <YeQei0xNzMq7bFdg@zn.tnic>
 <20220118192256.jzk5dnceeusq7x7u@treble>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220118192256.jzk5dnceeusq7x7u@treble>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 11:22:59AM -0800, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 02:32:59PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > so I like the local label and how it is more readable this way.
> > 
> > So, provided the memory clobber works (I wonder here if Josh has some
> > concrete failing cases which could be tested with your version) and
> > after the nitpicks have been addressed
> > 
> > Acked-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
> 
> I think Nick was already able to recreate the original issue.  I'll run
> it through some more testing.
> 
> I wanted to make this change years ago, but couldn't because of legacy
> toolchains.  Here's hoping this is the final solution for those @#$%^
> macros.
> 
> Boris, thanks for looping Nick in, I should have done so to begin with.

Apparently this patch isn't going to work after all :-(

  https://lkml.kernel.org/r/202201190632.lhlaiCBk-lkp@intel.com

With the two WARN_ONs in media_request_object_complete(), GCC apparently
considers the two reachable() asm statements as duplicates, and it
removes the second one.

-- 
Josh