From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D16E3C433EF
	for <linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 21:46:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S233867AbiGRVqp (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 18 Jul 2022 17:46:45 -0400
Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38992 "EHLO
        lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S233858AbiGRVqn (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 18 Jul 2022 17:46:43 -0400
Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [IPv6:2001:8b0:10b:1236::1])
        by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3DF6B2125D;
        Mon, 18 Jul 2022 14:46:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:
        References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:
        Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description;
        bh=gB0Dyj6KD1xR0J9edWlW2XlEQizibh7QqbUWvK+mgdc=; b=eObLTaTy/3Us0YDbQ5gnsRcwcZ
        DuDFu+DbE2G2jh6j/NlBzj89vGk9Ot9DsAGhGZXwZxAfFuM3xbPLMzHXqe0n3NiJXDAh+zpSyesu0
        /yIaXYGLlRJLO48Nr+n3Vnlmc79kCqNiUDMJ6/kq4RR2yDSpknB2nX1fT9NxNE9ekd2lgagl20bVH
        vkOsh1WPu1uZkxgRXHmhJvTsImpDTfQ4JOzW9BxDlhdY3CASpc+BG1b0r1rdMS7KNI8Towfzug/bx
        d2SFavJYeWYJIZcPdOxkUhWJ/ovM6TuBKEo2rV1Yu1uzV7fjxk6NsX9Nh0koq5YwNtI5MIjCH5lvL
        nkIsd8tg==;
Received: from j130084.upc-j.chello.nl ([24.132.130.84] helo=worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net)
        by casper.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux))
        id 1oDYZN-00D3tf-Aq; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 21:46:25 +0000
Received: by worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
        id AC3489802A7; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 23:46:24 +0200 (CEST)
Date:   Mon, 18 Jul 2022 23:46:24 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc:     Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        x86@kernel.org, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        Joao Moreira <joao@overdrivepizza.com>,
        Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 00/20] KCFI support
Message-ID: <YtXUsIjT9IDGKUCv@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20220610233513.1798771-1-samitolvanen@google.com>
 <202206131001.6BA9933C@keescook>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <202206131001.6BA9933C@keescook>
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 10:04:12AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 04:34:53PM -0700, Sami Tolvanen wrote:
> > KCFI is a proposed forward-edge control-flow integrity scheme for
> > Clang, which is more suitable for kernel use than the existing CFI
> > scheme used by CONFIG_CFI_CLANG. KCFI doesn't require LTO, doesn't
> > alter function references to point to a jump table, and won't break
> > function address equality. The latest LLVM patch is here:
> > 
> >   https://reviews.llvm.org/D119296
> > 
> > This RFC series replaces the current arm64 CFI implementation with
> > KCFI and adds support for x86_64.
> 
> I think the "RFC" prefix for this series can be dropped. :)
> 
> It looks to me like all of Peter's concerns have been addressed. I'd say
> let's get the Clang side landed, and once that's done, land this via x86
> -tip?
> 
> Peter and Will does this sound right to you? It touches arm64, so if
> -tip isn't okay, I could take it in one of my trees?

Sorry, I was a bit pre-occupied with this retbleed crud, I'll try and
have a look at things shortly.