Re: [PATCH v7 00/17] Add support for Clang LTO

From: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
	Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>,
	Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	PCI <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 00/17] Add support for Clang LTO
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 11:51:41 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKwvOdkcfg9ae_NyctS+3E8Ka5XqHXXAMJ4aUYHiC=BSph9E2A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202012010929.3788AF5@keescook>

On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 9:31 AM Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 12:01:31PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > Hi Sami,
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 02:07:14PM -0800, Sami Tolvanen wrote:
> > > This patch series adds support for building the kernel with Clang's
> > > Link Time Optimization (LTO). In addition to performance, the primary
> > > motivation for LTO is to allow Clang's Control-Flow Integrity (CFI) to
> > > be used in the kernel. Google has shipped millions of Pixel devices
> > > running three major kernel versions with LTO+CFI since 2018.
> > >
> > > Most of the patches are build system changes for handling LLVM bitcode,
> > > which Clang produces with LTO instead of ELF object files, postponing
> > > ELF processing until a later stage, and ensuring initcall ordering.
> > >
> > > Note that v7 brings back arm64 support as Will has now staged the
> > > prerequisite memory ordering patches [1], and drops x86_64 while we work
> > > on fixing the remaining objtool warnings [2].
> >
> > Sounds like you're going to post a v8, but that's the plan for merging
> > that? The arm64 parts look pretty good to me now.
>
> I haven't seen Masahiro comment on this in a while, so given the review
> history and its use (for years now) in Android, I will carry v8 (assuming
> all is fine with it) it in -next unless there are objections.

I had some minor stylistic feedback on the Kconfig changes; I'm happy
for you to land the bulk of the changes and then I follow up with
patches to the Kconfig after.
-- 
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers