lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 22:25:46 +0000 From: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> To: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Greg Hackmann <ghackmann@...gle.com>, Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>, Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>, Yury Norov <ynorov@...iumnetworks.com>, Alex Matveev <alxmtvv@...il.com>, Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, Maxim Kuvyrkov <maxim.kuvyrkov@...aro.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/18] arm64: don't disable ADR_PREL_PG_HI21* with ARM64_ERRATUM_843419 On 16 November 2017 at 22:14, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> wrote: > On 16 November 2017 at 21:37, Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 04:34:03PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >>> You still have not explained to us how GOLD avoids the erratum. >> >> Sorry, I didn't realize you were asking that. If gold spots erratum >> sequences, looks like it creates stubs to break them up: >> >> https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=blob;f=gold/aarch64.cc#l8396 >> >> It also attempts to optimize the code by replacing adrps in these >> sequences with adr where possible, but otherwise doesn't appear to >> touch them: >> >> https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=blob;f=gold/aarch64.cc#l2053 >> > > OK, so my concern here is that this code probably only operates on > fully linked binaries, and not partially linked object files like > kernel modules. The same applies to ld.bfd, which is why we need to > use the large module *model* not module > instead of a code model that may emit adrp > instructions.. > > What is preventing us from using the large model with clang? I know it > uses movk/movz pairs rather than literals, but this shouldn't matter > for modules, given that we support static ELF relocations.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists