From: Denis Efremov <efremov@linux.com>
To: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@gmail.com>,
Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] modpost: check for static EXPORT_SYMBOL* functions
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2019 19:44:49 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d26ff0d1-fc45-d5b5-fe84-26fa9df09c3e@linux.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK7LNATnC6eVmahn=44F-j3Uf-x+cUWuP0q7QuP800biL9QJiA@mail.gmail.com>
On 30.07.2019 19:29, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> I prefer this, but why do you need to check type?
>
> Doesn't this work?
>
> for (sym = info.symtab_start; sym < info.symtab_stop; sym++) {
> unsigned char bind = ELF_ST_BIND(sym->st_info);
>
> struct symbol *s = find_symbol(remove_dot(info.strtab +
> sym->st_name));
>
> if (s && (bind == STB_GLOBAL || bind == STB_WEAK))
> s->is_static = 0;
> }
This works. However, I thought it will be too costly to call find_symbol
on each symbol. Hence, 'type == STT_OBJECT || type == STT_FUNC || type
== STT_NOTYPE' is a small performance optimization because we need to
check only variables and functions. Is it worth to remove it in v4?
Denis
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-30 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-14 15:28 [RFC PATCH] modpost: check for static EXPORT_SYMBOL* functions Denis Efremov
2019-07-15 14:43 ` Emil Velikov
2019-07-27 12:55 ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-07-27 19:13 ` Denis Efremov
2019-07-28 2:00 ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-07-28 10:09 ` [PATCH] " Denis Efremov
2019-07-29 3:29 ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-07-29 9:51 ` Denis Efremov
2019-07-29 5:13 ` Stephen Rothwell
2019-07-29 9:16 ` Denis Efremov
2019-07-29 9:32 ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-07-29 12:40 ` Stephen Rothwell
2019-07-29 12:52 ` Denis Efremov
2019-07-29 13:07 ` Stephen Rothwell
2019-07-29 9:22 ` [PATCH v2] " Denis Efremov
2019-07-29 12:20 ` Stephen Rothwell
2019-07-29 12:47 ` Denis Efremov
2019-07-29 14:18 ` [PATCH v3] " Denis Efremov
2019-07-29 22:26 ` Stephen Rothwell
2019-07-30 6:59 ` Denis Efremov
2019-07-30 16:29 ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-07-30 16:44 ` Denis Efremov [this message]
2019-07-30 17:21 ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-07-30 18:11 ` [PATCH v4] " Denis Efremov
2019-07-30 18:15 ` Denis Efremov
2019-07-31 8:54 ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-08-01 2:20 ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-08-01 6:17 ` Denis Efremov
2019-08-01 6:06 ` [PATCH v5] " Denis Efremov
2019-08-07 15:12 ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-08-13 16:07 ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-08-13 21:11 ` Denis Efremov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d26ff0d1-fc45-d5b5-fe84-26fa9df09c3e@linux.com \
--to=efremov@linux.com \
--cc=emil.l.velikov@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michal.lkml@markovi.net \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.