Re: [PATCH] compiler.h: avoid escaped section names

[Arvind Sankar]

On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 04:08:01PM -0400, Arvind Sankar wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 12:43:18PM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > The stringification operator, `#`, in the preprocessor escapes strings.
> > For example, `# "foo"` becomes `"\"foo\""`.  GCC and Clang differ in how
> > they treat section names that contain \".
> > 
> > The portable solution is to not use a string literal with the
> > preprocessor stringification operator.
> > 
> > In this case, since __section unconditionally uses the stringification
> > operator, we actually want the more verbose
> > __attribute__((__section__())).
> > 
> > Link: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42950
> > Fixes: commit e04462fb82f8 ("Compiler Attributes: remove uses of __attribute__ from compiler.h")
> > Signed-off-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/compiler.h | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/compiler.h b/include/linux/compiler.h
> > index 92ef163a7479..ac45f6d40d39 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/compiler.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/compiler.h
> > @@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ void ftrace_likely_update(struct ftrace_likely_data *f, int val,
> >  	extern typeof(sym) sym;					\
> >  	static const unsigned long __kentry_##sym		\
> >  	__used							\
> > -	__section("___kentry" "+" #sym )			\
> > +	__attribute__((__section__("___kentry+" #sym)))		\
> >  	= (unsigned long)&sym;
> >  #endif
> >  
> > -- 
> > 2.28.0.709.gb0816b6eb0-goog
> > 
> 
> There was this previous mini-thread:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200629205448.GA1474367@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> and this older one:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190904181740.GA19688@xxxxxxxxx/
> 
> Just for my own curiosity: how does KENTRY actually get used? grep
> doesn't show any hits, and the thread from 2019 was actually going to
> drop it if I read it right, and also just remove stringification from
> the __section macro.
> 
> There are still other instances that need to be fixed, right?
> 
> Thanks.

Ignore the last question, I see you have separate patches for the rest.