From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pf1-f177.google.com (mail-pf1-f177.google.com [209.85.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EC3A72 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 18:47:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf1-f177.google.com with SMTP id m26so6251597pff.3 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 11:47:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=flE15Vag1x2qH6k6oFaTp0PZRJ1ZGZb8THhO62QsLjE=; b=BeR9rE+h6oOZjaOHDA370v0suUCXLikBJQsw9Cy8vwaf1/MG0Ui7pXfraYG/Nyb0qd iqaQ02SSXwqqNyFydlvvqyk1qE2NADJLiuipogiDTsBcouXv5GaZVVwijXEiHrpht0kN 02AqT5qkbHDgVntpqt7nKyIht9C8bmQJYVhdw= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=flE15Vag1x2qH6k6oFaTp0PZRJ1ZGZb8THhO62QsLjE=; b=J+TBOpvaXH7Cf1YBa3DMLI/asPYY5Gaslw2oiXOByRE/gjw4KOQTbz9jVX4kCJIxhe Xe+0Bbr9+l5FpervNFIlAfXbLQLPWCinWLDvf5Oy+bf7qs6WYHsghxsrd95yAEPFCpQC 0APz5W0rJny9k4cxQ0pVtIAj4v8Fu2WaZlcNcriB2TAHXnBYy/Qw51+SC5bWiUa7qSga 8dZOX1h3m0hbpp/3t+abR6bnqbIREogqYugB7HbSgk+bNYWtEE30dQu/7uo9i3pObns2 /qpzPUXEMg8DIoAUUXzjbRBOn5MKYBAHPI0uibTmSNDK3OzjsMNM8pCxQ3iMnGj9V+7a XAIQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530lNoYqXoqvan/umJvy0mOoZOJpYkvlDlLrbLGyljn2dkl7nndp x7NisFCTchpAY5Oy90QfSla3lA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzYq661wv4AErhvhHm19916LjgZM0cmC1UFXDThhI7WtsP5/hjhJSDpBPLelZ054c+1Ggo7wA== X-Received: by 2002:a62:7dd0:0:b0:44c:b0b8:6eaa with SMTP id y199-20020a627dd0000000b0044cb0b86eaamr7036185pfc.73.1634237222778; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 11:47:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o12sm2954984pgn.33.2021.10.14.11.47.02 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 14 Oct 2021 11:47:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 11:47:01 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Sami Tolvanen , x86@kernel.org, Josh Poimboeuf , Peter Zijlstra , Nathan Chancellor , Nick Desaulniers , Sedat Dilek , Steven Rostedt , linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 09/15] x86: Use an opaque type for functions not callable from C Message-ID: <202110141141.870A67E@keescook> References: <20211013181658.1020262-1-samitolvanen@google.com> <20211013181658.1020262-10-samitolvanen@google.com> <202110140904.41B5183E@keescook> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: llvm@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 07:31:26PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 09:07:57AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > Looking at the changelog, DECLARE_ASM_FUNC_SYMBOL, makes a lot more > sense to me even if it doesn't specify the aspect that it is not called > by C but who cares - it is generic enough. Around we go. :) Josh[1] and Steven[2] explicitly disagreed with that name, leading to the current name[3]. Do you want it to be DECLARE_ASM_FUNC_SYMBOL() over those objections? I'd really like to finish this shed -- I need to take the bikes in from the rain. :P -Kees [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20211006032945.axlqh3vehgar6adr@treble/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20211006101654.6a5be402@gandalf.local.home/ [3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CABCJKufCaOXOUF43a-PQshO8aEsMNhZ2EiyGMSOp9ZGn57G=pg@mail.gmail.com/ -- Kees Cook