From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: x86@kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com, pjt@google.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, r.marek@assembler.cz,
jpoimboe@redhat.com, jikos@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] x86/retpoline: Simplify retpolines
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 12:36:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YDOXSw2vNLzRNdPN@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210218172151.835108198@infradead.org>
On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 05:59:39PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Currently out retpolines consist of 2 symbols,
> __x86_indirect_thunk_\reg, which is the compiler target, and
> __x86_retpoline_\reg, which is the actual retpoline. Both are
> consecutive in code and aligned such that for any one register they
> both live in the same cacheline:
>
> 0000000000000000 <__x86_indirect_thunk_rax>:
> 0: ff e0 jmpq *%rax
> 2: 90 nop
> 3: 90 nop
> 4: 90 nop
>
> 0000000000000005 <__x86_retpoline_rax>:
> 5: e8 07 00 00 00 callq 11 <__x86_retpoline_rax+0xc>
> a: f3 90 pause
> c: 0f ae e8 lfence
> f: eb f9 jmp a <__x86_retpoline_rax+0x5>
> 11: 48 89 04 24 mov %rax,(%rsp)
> 15: c3 retq
> 16: 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 nopw %cs:0x0(%rax,%rax,1)
>
> The thunk is an alternative_2, where one option is a jmp to the
> retpoline.
So the reason I originally did that was because objtool could not deal
with alternatives with stack ops. But we've recently fixed that.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-22 11:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-18 16:59 [RFC][PATCH 0/2] x86/retpoline: Retpoline on a diet Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-18 16:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/2] x86/retpoline: Simplify retpolines Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-22 11:36 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2021-02-18 16:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/2] x86/retpoline: Compress retpolines Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-19 7:14 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-02-22 11:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-18 18:46 ` [RFC PATCH] x86/retpolines: Prevent speculation after RET Borislav Petkov
2021-02-18 19:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-18 19:11 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-02-19 8:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-19 12:08 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-02-19 9:28 ` David Laight
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=YDOXSw2vNLzRNdPN@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=jikos@kernel.org \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=r.marek@assembler.cz \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--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
Powered by JetHome