On Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 02:12:46PM -0500, Daniel Díaz wrote: > Hello! > > On 05/10/22 06:31, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.4.217 release. > > There are 51 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > > let me know. > > > > Responses should be made by Fri, 07 Oct 2022 11:31:56 +0000. > > Anything received after that time might be too late. > > > > The whole patch series can be found in one patch at: > > https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v5.x/stable-review/patch-5.4.217-rc1.gz > > or in the git tree and branch at: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.4.y > > and the diffstat can be found below. > > > > thanks, > > > > greg k-h > > We are seeing a new warning on x86_64: > > /builds/linux/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S: Assembler messages: > /builds/linux/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:1756: Warning: no instruction mnemonic suffix given and no register operands; using default for `sysret' > arch/x86/entry/entry_64.o: warning: objtool: .entry.text+0x151: unsupported intra-function call > x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: arch/x86/boot/compressed/head_64.o: warning: relocation in read-only section `.head.text' > x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: warning: creating DT_TEXTREL in a PIE You mean only the third line here with objtool complaining about unsupported intra-function call, right? The other warnings were likely there before. > > This started happening after 984b78c4ecea49b0b4b5729a502b689a623fde27 ("x86/speculation: Fix RSB filling with CONFIG_RETPOLINE=n"). This is, in fact, introduced by the previous commit, 65e5a1959296e16a3566ff75e527f211f0bf5a26 ("x86/speculation: Change FILL_RETURN_BUFFER to work with objtool"). You see it once 984b78c4ecea is applied because your configs do not have CONFIG_RETPOLINE. Notice that I note in 65e5a1959296 that intra-function validation is missing in objtool in 5.4, which is why you are seeing this warning. Cascardo. > > The following configurations are affected: > > * x86_64, build > - gcc-8-allnoconfig-warnings > - gcc-8-tinyconfig-warnings > - gcc-8-x86_64_defconfig-warnings > - gcc-9-allnoconfig-warnings > - gcc-9-tinyconfig-warnings > - gcc-9-x86_64_defconfig-warnings > - gcc-10-allnoconfig-warnings > - gcc-10-defconfig-warnings > - gcc-10-tinyconfig-warnings > - gcc-11-allnoconfig-warnings > - gcc-11-defconfig-warnings > - gcc-11-lkftconfig-debug-kmemleak-warnings > - gcc-11-lkftconfig-debug-warnings > - gcc-11-lkftconfig-kasan-warnings > - gcc-11-lkftconfig-kselftest-kernel-warnings > - gcc-11-lkftconfig-kselftest-warnings > - gcc-11-lkftconfig-kunit-warnings > - gcc-11-lkftconfig-libgpiod-warnings > - gcc-11-lkftconfig-perf-warnings > - gcc-11-lkftconfig-rcutorture-warnings > - gcc-11-lkftconfig-warnings > - gcc-11-tinyconfig-warnings > - gcc-12-allnoconfig-warnings > - gcc-12-defconfig-warnings > - gcc-12-tinyconfig-warnings > - clang-11-allnoconfig-warnings > - clang-11-tinyconfig-warnings > - clang-11-x86_64_defconfig-warnings > - clang-12-allnoconfig-warnings > - clang-12-lkftconfig-warnings > - clang-12-tinyconfig-warnings > - clang-12-x86_64_defconfig-warnings > - clang-13-allnoconfig-warnings > - clang-13-lkftconfig-warnings > - clang-13-tinyconfig-warnings > - clang-13-x86_64_defconfig-warnings > - clang-14-allnoconfig-warnings > - clang-14-lkftconfig-kcsan-warnings > - clang-14-lkftconfig-warnings > - clang-14-tinyconfig-warnings > - clang-14-x86_64_defconfig-warnings > - clang-nightly-lkftconfig-warnings > - clang-nightly-tinyconfig-warnings > - clang-nightly-x86_64_defconfig-warnings > > > Greetings! > > Daniel Díaz > daniel.diaz@xxxxxxxxxx
