Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933479AbeAHNqj (ORCPT + 1 other); Mon, 8 Jan 2018 08:46:39 -0500 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([146.0.238.70]:49489 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932324AbeAHNqg (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jan 2018 08:46:36 -0500 Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 14:46:32 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Josh Poimboeuf cc: David Woodhouse , Andi Kleen , Paul Turner , LKML , Linus Torvalds , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Tim Chen , Dave Hansen , Kees Cook , Rik van Riel , Peter Zijlstra , Andy Lutomirski , Jiri Kosina , gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 01/10] x86/retpoline: Add initial retpoline support In-Reply-To: <20180108134220.2for3pwgqbmkkq2s@treble> Message-ID: References: <1515363085-4219-1-git-send-email-dwmw@amazon.co.uk> <1515363085-4219-2-git-send-email-dwmw@amazon.co.uk> <20180108134220.2for3pwgqbmkkq2s@treble> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: On Mon, 8 Jan 2018, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > On Sun, Jan 07, 2018 at 10:11:16PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > > diff --git a/arch/x86/Makefile b/arch/x86/Makefile > > index a20eacd..918e550 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/Makefile > > +++ b/arch/x86/Makefile > > @@ -235,6 +235,16 @@ KBUILD_CFLAGS += -Wno-sign-compare > > # > > KBUILD_CFLAGS += -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables > > > > +# Avoid indirect branches in kernel to deal with Spectre > > +ifdef CONFIG_RETPOLINE > > + RETPOLINE_CFLAGS += $(call cc-option,-mindirect-branch=thunk-extern -mindirect-branch-register) > > + ifneq ($(RETPOLINE_CFLAGS),) > > + KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(RETPOLINE_CFLAGS) -DRETPOLINE > > + else > > + $(warning Retpoline not supported in compiler. System may be insecure.) > > + endif > > +endif > > I wonder if an error might be more appropriate than a warning. I > learned from experience that a lot of people don't see these Makefile > warnings, and this would be a dangerous one to miss. > > Also if this were an error, you could get rid of the RETPOLINE define, > and that would be one less define cluttering up the already way-too-long > GCC arg list. It still allows to get the ASM part covered. If that's worth it I can't tell. Thanks, tglx