[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180108134220.2for3pwgqbmkkq2s@treble>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 07:42:20 -0600
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, tglx@...utronix.de,
Kees Cook <keescook@...gle.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>, gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 01/10] x86/retpoline: Add initial retpoline support
On Sun, Jan 07, 2018 at 10:11:16PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/Makefile b/arch/x86/Makefile
> index a20eacd..918e550 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/x86/Makefile
> @@ -235,6 +235,16 @@ KBUILD_CFLAGS += -Wno-sign-compare
> #
> KBUILD_CFLAGS += -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables
>
> +# Avoid indirect branches in kernel to deal with Spectre
> +ifdef CONFIG_RETPOLINE
> + RETPOLINE_CFLAGS += $(call cc-option,-mindirect-branch=thunk-extern -mindirect-branch-register)
> + ifneq ($(RETPOLINE_CFLAGS),)
> + KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(RETPOLINE_CFLAGS) -DRETPOLINE
> + else
> + $(warning Retpoline not supported in compiler. System may be insecure.)
> + endif
> +endif
I wonder if an error might be more appropriate than a warning. I
learned from experience that a lot of people don't see these Makefile
warnings, and this would be a dangerous one to miss.
Also if this were an error, you could get rid of the RETPOLINE define,
and that would be one less define cluttering up the already way-too-long
GCC arg list.
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists