Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-74566-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:50:59 +0000
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@suse.com>
Cc: masahiroy@kernel.org, nathan@kernel.org, nicolas@fjasle.eu,
	linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] kbuild: Use -fmin-function-alignment when available
Message-ID: <ZdXVk41lSMLx_Fmg@FVFF77S0Q05N>
References: <20240215151642.8970-1-petr.pavlu@suse.com>
 <ZdON5rbsYFsoulxm@FVFF77S0Q05N>
 <1c6bb7d4-59bf-4887-8a0a-03373d3d9c11@suse.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1c6bb7d4-59bf-4887-8a0a-03373d3d9c11@suse.com>

On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 04:28:23PM +0100, Petr Pavlu wrote:
> On 2/19/24 18:20, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 04:16:42PM +0100, Petr Pavlu wrote:
> >> GCC recently added option -fmin-function-alignment, which should appear
> >> in GCC 14. Unlike -falign-functions, this option causes all functions to
> >> be aligned at the specified value, including the cold ones.
> >>
> >> Detect availability of -fmin-function-alignment and use it instead of
> >> -falign-functions when present. Introduce CC_HAS_SANE_FUNCTION_ALIGNMENT
> >> and make the workarounds for the broken function alignment conditional
> >> on this setting.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@suse.com>
> > 
> > I don't have a GCC 14 build to play with, but this looks sound to me.
> > 
> > Petr, are you able to test an arm64 kernel with this and DYNAMIC_FTRACE
> > enabled? i.e. build that, and check that function symbols are all aligned to 8
> > bytes using objdump or similar? That way we could be pretty sure there's no
> > other latent issue in this area.
> 
> I tested an arm64 kernel with DYNAMIC_FTRACE, in particular with
> DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_CALL_OPS=y. That is actually the primary motivation
> for this patch. We ran in our environment into some incorrectly aligned
> functions with this option despite the kernel workarounds. They were
> reported as "Misaligned patch-site" warnings from ftrace_call_adjust().
> I don't observe them anymore with -fmin-function-alignment in my tests.
> Sorry, I should have mentioned this motivation in the commit message.

No problem; thanks for confirming!

Mark.