[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202202241654.1D43F008@keescook>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2022 16:55:08 -0800
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, joao@...rdrivepizza.com, hjl.tools@...il.com,
jpoimboe@...hat.com, andrew.cooper3@...rix.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ndesaulniers@...gle.com,
samitolvanen@...gle.com, mark.rutland@....com,
alyssa.milburn@...el.com, mbenes@...e.cz, rostedt@...dmis.org,
mhiramat@...nel.org, alexei.starovoitov@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/39] x86/ibt,ftrace: Search for __fentry__ location
On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 03:51:50PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Have ftrace_location() search the symbol for the __fentry__ location
> when it isn't at func+0 and use this for {,un}register_ftrace_direct().
>
> This avoids a whole bunch of assumptions about __fentry__ being at
> func+0.
>
> Suggested-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Cool. This should help with anything using __fentry__ tricks (i.e.
future CFI...), yes?
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists