lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 09:01:08 -0700 From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> Cc: x86@...nel.org, brgerst@...il.com, jiangshanlai@...il.com, Andrew.Cooper3@...rix.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: Simplify Retpoline thunk On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 05:51:16PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 08:27:36AM -0700, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 10:41:10PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > Now that we rewrite all the indirect call sites, per commit: > > > > > > 750850090081 ("x86/alternative: Implement .retpoline_sites support") > > > > > > it doesn't make sense to have the retpoline thunks be an ALTERNATIVE_2 > > > that still includes a 'naked' indirect jump. > > > > > > (this accidentally 'defunnels' i386 by going back to full retpolines) > > > > So mitigations=off no longer works on i386? > > Also true I suppose... does anybody care? /me runs like heck. > > I'd hate to make all this more complicated just because i386 tho :/ Not that I care... but at least the commit log should own up to it :-) -- Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists