lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Oct]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/9] x86/alternative: Implement .retpoline_sites support
On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 03:05:20PM -0700, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 11:43:43PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 02:11:18PM -0700, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 02:22:21PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> > > > +
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * CALL/JMP *%\reg
> > > > + */
> > > > +static int emit_indirect(int op, int reg, u8 *bytes)
> > >
> > > X86_64 is already equivalent to STACK_VALIDATION these days, but might
> > > as well clarify here where the retpoline_sites dependency comes from by
> > > changing this to '#ifdef CONFIG_STACK_VALIDATION'.
> >
> > Yeah, I was contemplating having x86_64 unconditionally select that.
> > Maybe we should.
>
> As far as I can tell, it already does that:
>
> select HAVE_STACK_VALIDATION if X86_64
> select HAVE_STATIC_CALL_INLINE if HAVE_STACK_VALIDATION
> select STACK_VALIDATION if HAVE_STACK_VALIDATION && (HAVE_STATIC_CALL_INLINE || RETPOLINE)

Oh right, I thought there was still a possible hole in there, but I
guess that's pretty solid. I suppose we should just remove the && ...
from the last line.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-10-14 00:17    [W:0.787 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site