[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180111163326.deqtbqt72avfweup@treble>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:33:26 -0600
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
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>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...gle.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>, gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] objtool: Ignore retpoline alternatives
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 04:27:38PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 19:48 -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> >
> > +#define ANNOTATE_NOSPEC_ALTERNATIVE \
> > + "999:\n\t" \
> > + ".pushsection .discard.nospec\n\t" \
> > + ".long 999b - .\n\t" \
> > + ".popsection\n\t"
> > +
>
> <mode name="peterz">
> Ick, numbers. Use .Lfoo_%= instead.
> </mode>
I seem to recall that not working with inline asm, maybe old versions of
GCC don't like it or something? I can try it and see if 0-day bot
complains.
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists