Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <46684c34-b790-dced-afc1-03cf0f5ad911@kernel.dk>
Date:   Tue, 11 Apr 2023 19:48:02 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux aarch64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.9.0
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the block tree
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20230327120017.6bb826d7@canb.auug.org.au>
 <20230327162630.wmxpycxhllt4clpt@treble>
 <20230328104719.65133586@canb.auug.org.au>
 <20230412073416.73a8ea1a@canb.auug.org.au>
 <20230411215518.u2fgi7napfcwyuce@treble>
 <4959d0b8-96fe-7fe5-8b36-7e0a266d1d17@kernel.dk>
 <20230412001400.yraku5fwsjdchxvk@treble>
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
In-Reply-To: <20230412001400.yraku5fwsjdchxvk@treble>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 4/11/23 6:14?PM, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 04:39:39PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>>>>> lib/iov_iter.o: warning: objtool: .altinstr_replacement+0x0: redundant UACCESS d
>>>>>>> isable
>>>>>>> lib/iov_iter.o: warning: objtool: iovec_from_user.part.0+0xc7: call to copy_comp
>>>>>>> at_iovec_from_user.part.0() with UACCESS enabled
>>>>>>> lib/iov_iter.o: warning: objtool: __import_iovec+0x21d: call to copy_compat_iovec_from_user.part.0() with UACCESS enabled
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Presumably introduced by commit
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   6376ce56feb6 ("iov_iter: import single vector iovecs as ITER_UBUF")    
>>
>> lib/iov_iter.o attached, gzip'ed. NOTE: if you disable either of the
>> copy_compat_iovec_from_user() as per diff below (commented out), then
>> it doesn't complain. Is there some bug where it thinks we'll hit both?
>> That should not be possible.
> 
> Yeah, the problem is an inter-procedural compiler optimization which
> moves the user_access_begin() out of copy_compat_iovec_from_user() and
> into its callers.

Ah, I see.

> Which is fine, but objtool doesn't like it as it expects the uaccess
> enable to not cross function boundaries.
> 
> Do the warnings go away if you make copy_compat_iovec_from_user()
> non-static?

Yep, if I kill the static, it stops complaining.

-- 
Jens Axboe