On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 11:26 PM Puranjay Mohan <puran...@kernel.org> wrote: > > Song Liu <s...@kernel.org> writes: > > > On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 4:10 PM Indu Bhagat <indu.bha...@oracle.com> wrote: > >> > >> On 2/12/25 3:32 PM, Song Liu wrote: > >> > I run some tests with this set and my RFC set [1]. Most of > >> > the test is done with kpatch-build. I tested both Puranjay's > >> > version [3] and my version [4]. > >> > > >> > For gcc 14.2.1, I have seen the following issue with this > >> > test [2]. This happens with both upstream and 6.13.2. > >> > The livepatch loaded fine, but the system spilled out the > >> > following warning quickly. > >> > > >> > >> In presence of the issue > >> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32666, I'd expect bad > >> data in SFrame section. Which may be causing this symptom? > >> > >> To be clear, the issue affects loaded kernel modules. I cannot tell for > >> certain - is there module loading involved in your test ? > > > > The KLP is a module, I guess that is also affected? > > > > During kpatch-build, we added some logic to drop the .sframe section. > > I guess this is wrong, as we need the .sframe section when we apply > > the next KLP. However, I don't think the issue is caused by missing > > .sframe section. > > Hi, I did the same testing and did not get the Warning. > > I am testing on the 6.12.11 kernel with GCC 11.4.1.
Could you please also try kernel 6.13.2? > Just to verify, the patch we are testing is: Yes, this is the test patch. > > --- >8 --- [...] > --- 8< --- > > P.S. - I have a downstream patch for create-diff-object to generate .sframe > sections for > livepatch module, will add it to the PR after some cleanups. Yeah, I think the .sframe section is still needed. Thanks, Song
