[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180111143206.GA6176@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:32:06 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
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>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>, gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
x86@...nel.org, bp@...en8.de, rga@...zon.de,
thomas.lendacky@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2.1] x86/retpoline: Fill return stack buffer on vmexit
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 02:28:32PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 08:20 -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> >
> > This seems weird. I liked v1 a lot better. What's the problem with
> > patching in the whole thing?
> >
> > Also, if you go back to v1, it should be an easy objtool fix, just add
> > ANNOTATE_NOSPEC_ALTERNATIVE in front of it.
>
> The objection was that I was patching in a fairly long set of
> instructions. I confess I don't actually know why that's a problem,
You get a giant string of NOPs, a single jmp should be faster.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists