Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] x86/relocs: Improve diagnostic for rejected absolute references

[Ingo Molnar]

* Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 at 17:57, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 at 03:43, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb+git@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > >   Absolute reference to symbol '.rodata+0x180' detected in .head.text (0xffffffff820cb4ba).
> >
> > Do we have any symbol name lookup logic anywhere?
> >
> 
> I can look into that. In this particular case, though, there is no
> symbol to look up as it is a anonymous jump table generated by the
> compiler. And the function name would be inaccurate too, as
> snp_cpuid_postprocess() got inlined into its caller. But I guess with
> the right DWARF data, at least the call site could be narrowed down a
> bit better.

So patch #2 is now upstream, but should I apply this diagnostic patch 
as-is, or will there be a -v2?

Thanks,

	Ingo