[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YgpEJ7BmuYtHkayT@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:59:35 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@...el.com>
Cc: linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@...ux.intel.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Bruce Schlobohm <bruce.schlobohm@...el.com>,
Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>,
kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>,
Evgenii Shatokhin <eshatokhin@...tuozzo.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Marios Pomonis <pomonis@...gle.com>,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>, Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 10/15] FG-KASLR: use a scripted approach to handle
.text.* sections
On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 12:34:34PM +0100, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
> Re "won't do" -- sorry for trying to hijack this thread a bit, but
> did I miss something? The last comments I've read were that LLVM
> tools need to change their approach for CFI on x86, and Sami went
> redo it, but I can't recall any "life-time" nacks.
Won't as in the lclang-cfi as it exists today. And I've understood that
this CFI model is a keeper. It is true that Sami has been working on an
alternative KCFI, but the little I can make of this proposal, it
still needs serious work. Also see here:
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220211133803.GV23216@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net
Specifically, I object to the existence of any __*cfi_check_fail symbol
on the grounds that it will bloat the code (and makes thinking about the
whole speculation angle more painful than it needs to be).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists