[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250822085553.GG3419281@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2025 10:55:53 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
Cc: Qing Zhao <qing.zhao@...cle.com>, gcc-patches@....gnu.org,
Joseph Myers <josmyers@...hat.com>,
Richard Biener <rguenther@...e.de>, Jan Hubicka <hubicka@....cz>,
Richard Earnshaw <richard.earnshaw@....com>,
Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@....com>,
Marcus Shawcroft <marcus.shawcroft@....com>,
Kyrylo Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@....com>,
Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@...il.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Andrew Waterman <andrew@...ive.com>,
Jim Wilson <jim.wilson.gcc@...il.com>,
Dan Li <ashimida.1990@...il.com>, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/7] x86: Add x86_64 Kernel Control Flow Integrity
implementation
On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 01:36:43AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 10:19:15AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Anyway, I might be able to deal with the indirect call not being r11,
> > but it'll take a bit of prodding. Also it will shatter my plans to move
> > the hash to eax to save a few bytes in instruction encoding. Let me go
> > poke around with that UDB patch see what's possible.
>
> I think I have it mostly working to force r11 when doing kcfi and
> retpoline now, though I'm seeing a few glitches still. I'll keep working
> on it.
Awesome, thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists