From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>,
Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Daniel Kiss <daniel.kiss@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/17] ctype: Work around Clang -mbranch-protection=none bug
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 11:37:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202006291136.E6DF8242@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKwvOd=DMfmvfiEX7KDPLs75SbNz+LAGSwC3V_=LgGH3kjtE=g@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:02:51AM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> This is definitely better than the empty function. Though a patch is
> posted for fixing this in LLVM. Assuming that lands before this, we
> might not actually need this workaround?
>
> arch/arm64/Kconfig
> 1625 config ARM64_BTI_KERNEL
> ...
> 1633 # https://reviews.llvm.org/rGb8ae3fdfa579dbf366b1bb1cbfdbf8c51db7fa55
> 1634 depends on !CC_IS_CLANG || CLANG_VERSION >= 100001
>
> So if Daniel's patch lands AND is backported into the clang 10.0.1
> release, then we might not need to carry this workaround? Either way,
True, though as I mentioned in the review, I don't think it's quite
right -- the warning getting removed is actually quite valuable.
> Reviewed-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Thanks!
--
Kees Cook
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>,
Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/17] ctype: Work around Clang -mbranch-protection=none bug
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 11:37:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202006291136.E6DF8242@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKwvOd=DMfmvfiEX7KDPLs75SbNz+LAGSwC3V_=LgGH3kjtE=g@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:02:51AM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> This is definitely better than the empty function. Though a patch is
> posted for fixing this in LLVM. Assuming that lands before this, we
> might not actually need this workaround?
>
> arch/arm64/Kconfig
> 1625 config ARM64_BTI_KERNEL
> ...
> 1633 # https://reviews.llvm.org/rGb8ae3fdfa579dbf366b1bb1cbfdbf8c51db7fa55
> 1634 depends on !CC_IS_CLANG || CLANG_VERSION >= 100001
>
> So if Daniel's patch lands AND is backported into the clang 10.0.1
> release, then we might not need to carry this workaround? Either way,
True, though as I mentioned in the review, I don't think it's quite
right -- the warning getting removed is actually quite valuable.
> Reviewed-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Thanks!
--
Kees Cook
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Daniel Kiss <daniel.kiss@arm.com>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>,
Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/17] ctype: Work around Clang -mbranch-protection=none bug
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 11:37:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202006291136.E6DF8242@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKwvOd=DMfmvfiEX7KDPLs75SbNz+LAGSwC3V_=LgGH3kjtE=g@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:02:51AM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> This is definitely better than the empty function. Though a patch is
> posted for fixing this in LLVM. Assuming that lands before this, we
> might not actually need this workaround?
>
> arch/arm64/Kconfig
> 1625 config ARM64_BTI_KERNEL
> ...
> 1633 # https://reviews.llvm.org/rGb8ae3fdfa579dbf366b1bb1cbfdbf8c51db7fa55
> 1634 depends on !CC_IS_CLANG || CLANG_VERSION >= 100001
>
> So if Daniel's patch lands AND is backported into the clang 10.0.1
> release, then we might not need to carry this workaround? Either way,
True, though as I mentioned in the review, I don't think it's quite
right -- the warning getting removed is actually quite valuable.
> Reviewed-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Thanks!
--
Kees Cook
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-29 21:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 94+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-29 6:18 [PATCH v4 00/17] Warn on orphan section placement Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 01/17] vmlinux.lds.h: Add .gnu.version* to DISCARDS Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 02/17] vmlinux.lds.h: Avoid KASAN and KCSAN's unwanted sections Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 03/17] vmlinux.lds.h: Split ELF_DETAILS from STABS_DEBUG Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 04/17] vmlinux.lds.h: Add .symtab, .strtab, and .shstrtab to ELF_DETAILS Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 05/17] ctype: Work around Clang -mbranch-protection=none bug Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 8:15 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-06-29 8:15 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-06-29 8:15 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-06-29 14:43 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 14:43 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 14:43 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 15:06 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 15:06 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 15:06 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 15:08 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-06-29 15:08 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-06-29 15:08 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-06-29 15:16 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 15:16 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 15:16 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 18:02 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-29 18:02 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-29 18:02 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-29 18:37 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2020-06-29 18:37 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 18:37 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 06/17] efi/libstub: Disable -mbranch-protection Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 07/17] arm64/build: Use common DISCARDS in linker script Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 08/17] arm64/mm: Remove needless section quotes Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 19:53 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-29 19:53 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-29 19:53 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-29 20:03 ` Joe Perches
2020-06-29 20:03 ` Joe Perches
2020-06-29 20:03 ` Joe Perches
2020-06-29 20:29 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-29 20:29 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-29 20:29 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-29 20:04 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 20:04 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 20:04 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 20:54 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-06-29 20:54 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-06-29 20:54 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-06-29 21:06 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-06-29 21:06 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-06-29 21:06 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-06-29 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 09/17] arm64/build: Remove .eh_frame* sections due to unwind tables Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 10/17] arm64/kernel: Remove needless Call Frame Information annotations Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 11/17] arm64/build: Warn on orphan section placement Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 12/17] arm/build: Refactor linker script headers Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 13/17] arm/build: Explicitly keep .ARM.attributes sections Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 14/17] arm/build: Warn on orphan section placement Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 15:54 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-06-29 15:54 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-06-29 18:07 ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2020-06-29 18:07 ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2020-06-29 18:15 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-06-29 18:15 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-06-29 19:03 ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2020-06-29 19:03 ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2020-06-29 19:47 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-29 19:47 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-29 19:47 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-29 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 15/17] arm/boot: " Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 16/17] x86/build: " Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 17/17] x86/boot: " Kees Cook
2020-06-29 6:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-08-21 16:02 ` [PATCH v4 00/17] " Will Deacon
2020-08-21 16:02 ` Will Deacon
2020-08-21 17:36 ` Kees Cook
2020-08-21 17:36 ` Kees Cook
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=202006291136.E6DF8242@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bp@suse.de \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com \
--cc=daniel.kiss@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=natechancellor@gmail.com \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=nivedita@alum.mit.edu \
--cc=pcc@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will@kernel.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.