[lkml]   [2021]   [Feb]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 6/6] objtool,x86: Rewrite retpoline thunk calls
On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 01:39:20AM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 11:01:58PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > We could, but it so happens Joerg is also wanting negative features.
> Juergen.

Argh! I should stick to jgross. Sorry.

> > So I was thikning that perhaps we can convince Boris they're not
> > really all that aweful after all :-)
> Well, I'm not crazy about this, TBH - I totally agree with Josh:
> "with objtool generating code, it's going to be a maze to figure out
> where the generated code is coming from"
> and without a real good reason to do this, what's the point? I know,
> because we can. :-)


- straight line execution is always better than a round-trip to
somewhere else, no matter how trivial.
- supposely EIBRS (yeah, I know, there's a paper out there) should
result in no longer using retpolines.
- I really, as in _REALLY_ don't want to do a CET enabled retpoline
- IOW, retpolines should be on their way out (knock on wood)
- doing this was fun :-)
- this stuff was mostly trivial make work stuff I could do with a head
full of snot and a headache.
- if we had negative alternatives objtool doesn't need to actually
rewrite code in this case. It could simply emit alternative entries
and call it a day.
- objtool already rewrites code
- I have more cases for objtool to rewrite code (I'll see if I can
rebase and post that this weekend -- no promises).
- also

 \ /
  Last update: 2021-02-20 17:50    [W:0.088 / U:0.448 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site