Re: [PATCH 00/46] gcc-LTO support for the kernel

[Jiri Slaby]

On 14. 11. 22, 12:56, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 at 12:44, Jiri Slaby (SUSE) <jirislaby@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > this is the first call for comments (and kbuild complaints) for this
> > support of gcc (full) LTO in the kernel. Most of the patches come from
> > Andi. Me and Martin rebased them to new kernels and fixed the to-use
> > known issues. Also I updated most of the commit logs and reordered the
> > patches to groups of patches with similar intent.
> >
> > The very first patch comes from Alexander and is pending on some x86
> > queue already (I believe). I am attaching it only for completeness.
> > Without that, the kernel does not boot (LTO reorders a lot).
>
> You didn't cc me on that patch so I will reply here: I don't think
> this is the right solution.
> On x86, there is a lot of stuff injected into .head.text that simply
> does not belong there, and getting rid of the __head annotation and
> dropping __HEAD from the Xen pvh head.S file would be a much better
> solution.

I think Alexander was working on that too. I'm not sure -- anyway, we 
still have the other fix. That is putting startup_64() to a special 
section and put that to the beginning of vmlinux using lds. (Until 
.head.text is completely gone for good -- same as on arm, you wrote 
somewhere.)

In any case, that patch was added only for reference, if anyone wants to 
give the series a try. Next time, I can attach the other workaround ;).

I don't expect anyone will take the series as is. There will be a lot of 
comments, I suppose. Hence many re-spins...

thanks,
--
js
suse labs