On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 08:09:16PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote: > On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 at 19:40, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulni...@google.com> > wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 10:21 AM Borislav Petkov <b...@alien8.de> wrote:
> > > init/calibrate.o: warning: objtool: asan.module_ctor()+0xc: call without > > > frame pointer save/setup > > > init/calibrate.o: warning: objtool: asan.module_dtor()+0xc: call without > > > frame pointer save/setup > > > init/version.o: warning: objtool: asan.module_ctor()+0xc: call without > > > frame pointer save/setup > > > init/version.o: warning: objtool: asan.module_dtor()+0xc: call without > > > frame pointer save/setup > > > certs/system_keyring.o: warning: objtool: asan.module_ctor()+0xc: call > > > without frame pointer save/setup > > > certs/system_keyring.o: warning: objtool: asan.module_dtor()+0xc: call > > > without frame pointer save/setup > > This one also appears with Clang 11. This is new I think because we > started emitting ASAN ctors for globals redzone initialization. > > I think we really do not care about precise stack frames in these > compiler-generated functions. So, would it be reasonable to make > objtool ignore all *san.module_ctor and *san.module_dtor functions (we > have them for ASAN, TSAN, MSAN)? The thing is, if objtool cannot follow, it cannot generate ORC data and our unwinder cannot unwind through the instrumentation, and that is a fail. Or am I missing something here?
