From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965115AbeALTRE (ORCPT + 1 other); Fri, 12 Jan 2018 14:17:04 -0500 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([193.170.194.197]:43896 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964998AbeALTRD (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jan 2018 14:17:03 -0500 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 11:17:01 -0800 From: Andi Kleen To: David Woodhouse Cc: Andi Kleen , tglx@linutronix.de, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, arjan.van.de.ven@intel.com, peterz@infradead.org, Andi Kleen , jeyu@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] retpoline/module: Taint kernel for missing retpoline in module Message-ID: <20180112191700.67eziuwklmbk5mqn@two.firstfloor.org> References: <20180112175507.31750-1-andi@firstfloor.org> <1515783702.22302.488.camel@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1515783702.22302.488.camel@infradead.org> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: > It doesn't make a lot of sense to have a taint flag for a *partial* > retpoline, but not in the case that we have *no* mitigation in place. The only thing that makes sense checking for is the C compiler option. Everything else which needs manual changes we cannot check. So even if we add more things I don't think this particular check will change. > So maybe we should drop the taint part, and just make the kernel report > that it is (partially) vulnerable to Spectre V2, just as in the > CONFIG_RETPOLINE && !RETPOLINE case? Ok I can drop the taint part. The reporting is already implemented. -Andi