From: Miguel Ojeda miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com
commit a6e60d84989fa0e91db7f236eda40453b0e44afa upstream.
The upcoming GCC 9 release extends the -Wmissing-attributes warnings (enabled by -Wall) to C and aliases: it warns when particular function attributes are missing in the aliases but not in their target.
In particular, it triggers for all the init/cleanup_module aliases in the kernel (defined by the module_init/exit macros), ending up being very noisy.
These aliases point to the __init/__exit functions of a module, which are defined as __cold (among other attributes). However, the aliases themselves do not have the __cold attribute.
Since the compiler behaves differently when compiling a __cold function as well as when compiling paths leading to calls to __cold functions, the warning is trying to point out the possibly-forgotten attribute in the alias.
In order to keep the warning enabled, we decided to silence this case. Ideally, we would mark the aliases directly as __init/__exit. However, there are currently around 132 modules in the kernel which are missing __init/__exit in their init/cleanup functions (either because they are missing, or for other reasons, e.g. the functions being called from somewhere else); and a section mismatch is a hard error.
A conservative alternative was to mark the aliases as __cold only. However, since we would like to eventually enforce __init/__exit to be always marked, we chose to use the new __copy function attribute (introduced by GCC 9 as well to deal with this). With it, we copy the attributes used by the target functions into the aliases. This way, functions that were not marked as __init/__exit won't have their aliases marked either, and therefore there won't be a section mismatch.
Note that the warning would go away marking either the extern declaration, the definition, or both. However, we only mark the definition of the alias, since we do not want callers (which only see the declaration) to be compiled as if the function was __cold (and therefore the paths leading to those calls would be assumed to be unlikely).
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190123173707.GA16603@gmail.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190206175627.GA20399@gmail.com/ Suggested-by: Martin Sebor msebor@gcc.gnu.org Acked-by: Jessica Yu jeyu@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Stefan Agner stefan@agner.ch Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
--- include/linux/module.h | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/include/linux/module.h +++ b/include/linux/module.h @@ -130,13 +130,13 @@ extern void cleanup_module(void); #define module_init(initfn) \ static inline initcall_t __maybe_unused __inittest(void) \ { return initfn; } \ - int init_module(void) __attribute__((alias(#initfn))); + int init_module(void) __copy(initfn) __attribute__((alias(#initfn)));
/* This is only required if you want to be unloadable. */ #define module_exit(exitfn) \ static inline exitcall_t __maybe_unused __exittest(void) \ { return exitfn; } \ - void cleanup_module(void) __attribute__((alias(#exitfn))); + void cleanup_module(void) __copy(exitfn) __attribute__((alias(#exitfn)));
#endif