From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linux-foundation.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@google.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>,
gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] objtool: Ignore retpoline alternatives
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:48:26 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180111164826.v26m2vqfqw667zx2@treble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1515688778.22302.372.camel@infradead.org>
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 04:39:38PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 10:33 -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 04:27:38PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 19:48 -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > +#define ANNOTATE_NOSPEC_ALTERNATIVE \
> > > > + "999:\n\t" \
> > > > + ".pushsection .discard.nospec\n\t" \
> > > > + ".long 999b - .\n\t" \
> > > > + ".popsection\n\t"
> > > > +
> > >
> > > Ick, numbers. Use .Lfoo_%= instead.
> > >
> > I seem to recall that not working with inline asm, maybe old versions of
> > GCC don't like it or something? I can try it and see if 0-day bot
> > complains.
>
> You just need %= (for inline asm) instead of \@ (for .macro).
>
> I already fixed it up in
> http://git.infradead.org/users/dwmw2/linux-retpoline.git/ and will get
> nagmail from 0day shortly if it doesn't work :)
>
> (I love you Fengguang)
I found a description from an old commit of mine:
3d1e236022cc ("objtool: Prevent GCC from merging annotate_unreachable()")
> A workaround for this issue is to ensure that each instance of the
> inline asm statement uses a different label, so that GCC sees the
> statements are unique and leaves them alone. The inline asm ‘%=’ token
> could be used for that, but unfortunately older versions of GCC don't
> support it. So I implemented a poor man's version of it with the
> __LINE__ macro.
The above macro is protected by '#ifdef RETPOLINE', and I seriously
doubt 0-day is testing with an unreleased version of GCC. So you
shouldn't see a 0-day warning.
I think I heard that retpolines won't be ported to anything older than
GCC 4.9, so maybe it's safe to use '%='. I don't remember when it was
introduced into GCC though.
--
Josh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-11 16:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-11 1:48 [PATCH 0/3] objtool: retpoline compatibility Josh Poimboeuf
2018-01-11 1:48 ` [PATCH 1/3] objtool: Detect jumps to retpoline thunks Josh Poimboeuf
2018-01-11 1:48 ` [PATCH 2/3] objtool: Ignore retpoline alternatives Josh Poimboeuf
2018-01-11 16:27 ` David Woodhouse
2018-01-11 16:33 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-01-11 16:39 ` David Woodhouse
2018-01-11 16:48 ` Josh Poimboeuf [this message]
2018-01-11 16:55 ` David Woodhouse
2018-01-11 17:25 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-01-11 16:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-01-11 17:05 ` Jiri Kosina
2018-01-11 17:01 ` Jiri Kosina
2018-01-11 17:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-01-11 17:19 ` David Woodhouse
2018-01-11 17:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-01-11 16:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-01-11 17:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-01-11 17:37 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-01-11 17:43 ` David Woodhouse
2018-01-11 17:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-01-12 20:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2018-01-11 17:57 ` David Woodhouse
2018-01-11 1:48 ` [PATCH 3/3] Revert "x86/retpoline: Temporarily disable objtool when CONFIG_RETPOLINE=y" Josh Poimboeuf
2018-01-11 10:22 ` [PATCH 0/3] objtool: retpoline compatibility David Woodhouse
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180111164826.v26m2vqfqw667zx2@treble \
--to=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=gregkh@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jikos@kernel.org \
--cc=keescook@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®