Sathvika Vasireddy wrote:
arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.o: warning: objtool: kvmppc_fill_pt_regs+0x30:
unannotated intra-function call
As an attempt to fix it, I tried expanding ANNOTATE_INTRA_FUNCTION_CALL
macro to indicate that the branch target is valid. It then threw another
warning (arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.o: warning: objtool:
kvmppc_fill_pt_regs+0x38: intra_function_call not a direct call). The
below diff just removes the warnings for me, but I'm not very sure if
this is the best way to fix the objtool warnings seen with this
particular file. Please let me know if there are any better ways to fix it.
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c
index 0dce93ccaadf..b6a413824b98 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c
@@ -917,7 +917,9 @@ static void kvmppc_fill_pt_regs(struct pt_regs *regs)
asm("mr %0, 1" : "=r"(r1));
asm("mflr %0" : "=r"(lr));
asm("mfmsr %0" : "=r"(msr));
+ asm(".pushsection .discard.intra_function_calls; .long 999f;
.popsection; 999:");
asm("bl 1f; 1: mflr %0" : "=r"(ip));
I don't think you can assume that there won't be anything in between two
asm statements. Does it work if you combine both the above asm
statements into a single one?
Even if that works, I don't think it is good to expand the macro here.
That asm statement looks to be trying to grab the current nip. I don't
know enough about that code, and someone who knows more about KVM may be
able to help, but it looks like we should be able to simply set 'ip' to
the address of kvmppc_fill_pt_regs()?
- Naveen