Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
Date:   Fri, 15 Apr 2022 18:07:50 -0700
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To:     "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>
Cc:     mark.rutland@arm.com, broonie@kernel.org, ardb@kernel.org,
        nobuta.keiya@fujitsu.com, sjitindarsingh@gmail.com,
        catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/9] arm64: livepatch: Use DWARF Call Frame
 Information for frame pointer validation
Message-ID: <20220416010750.cuf7tf5dgd434kac@treble>
References: <95691cae4f4504f33d0fc9075541b1e7deefe96f>
 <20220407202518.19780-1-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>
 <20220408002147.pk7clzruj6sawj7z@treble>
 <15a22f4b-f04a-15e1-8f54-5b3147d8df7d@linux.microsoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <15a22f4b-f04a-15e1-8f54-5b3147d8df7d@linux.microsoft.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 12:18:13PM -0500, Madhavan T. Venkataraman wrote:
> > There are actually several similarities between your new format and ORC,
> > which is also an objtool-created DWARF alternative.  It would be
> > interesting to see if they could be combined somehow.
> > 
> 
> I will certainly look into it. So, if I decide to merge the two, I might want
> to make a minor change to the ORC structure. Would that be OK with you?

Yes, in fact I would expect it, since ORC is quite x86-specific at the
moment.  So it would need some abstractions to make it more multi-arch
friendly.

-- 
Josh