On Wed, Aug 27, 2025 at 12:01:09AM -0700, Eduard Zingerman wrote: > On Tue, 2025-08-26 at 23:52 -0700, Eduard Zingerman wrote: > > [...] > > > If we are being really paranoid about LTO builds, is __noclone sufficient? > > E.g. [1] does not imply that signature can't be changed. > > We currently apply only __retain__, here is a little test with both attributes: > > Nope, there are also 'used' and 'noinline' applied. > With these the function is preserved as expected. > Sorry for the noise. Yeah, 'used' forces the function to be emitted even if it appears unreferenced. Together with 'noclone', 'retain' and 'noinline', should ensure the symbol exists and can be reliably found by resolve_btfids. We could be extra paranoid and mimic EXPORT_SYMBOL(), moving the symbols to their own section, but in practice I don't think this is strictly necessary, even in presence of aggressive compiler / LTO optimizations. Thanks, -Andrea
