[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210219215530.ivzzv3oavhuip6un@treble>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 15:55:30 -0600
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, pjt@...gle.com, mbenes@...e.cz, jgross@...e.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 6/6] objtool,x86: Rewrite retpoline thunk calls
On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 09:43:06PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Arguably it would be simpler to do the other way around, but
> unfortunately alternatives don't work that way, we cannot say:
>
> ALTERNATIVE "call __x86_indirect_thunk_\reg",
> "call *%reg", ~X86_FEATURE_RETPOLINE
>
> That is, there is no negative form of alternatives.
X86_FEATURE_NO_RETPOLINE?
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists