Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 25 Jan 2018 09:10:24 -0600
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc:     David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com,
        pjt@google.com, jikos@kernel.org, gregkh@linux-foundation.org,
        dave.hansen@intel.com, mingo@kernel.org, riel@redhat.com,
        luto@amacapital.net, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
        ak@linux.intel.com, keescook@google.com, peterz@infradead.org,
        tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/pti] x86/retpoline: Fill return stack buffer on vmexit
Message-ID: <20180125151024.bidjr26r667vs7h5@treble>
References: <1515755487-8524-1-git-send-email-dwmw@amazon.co.uk>
 <tip-117cc7a908c83697b0b737d15ae1eb5943afe35b@git.kernel.org>
 <20180125120743.ey32gvl5mjam4r2s@pd.tnic>
 <1516882849.30244.94.camel@infradead.org>
 <20180125124554.vdx7rrnfrxrzl2ng@pd.tnic>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180125124554.vdx7rrnfrxrzl2ng@pd.tnic>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0.1 (2016-04-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 01:45:54PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > +/* Like alternative_io, but for replacing a direct call with another one. */
> > > +#define alternative_void_call(oldfunc, newfunc, feature, input...)		\
> > > +	asm volatile (ALTERNATIVE("call %P[old]", "call %P[new]", feature)	\
> > > +		: : [old] "i" (oldfunc), [new] "i" (newfunc), ## input)
> > 
> > But you aren't doing the call at all in the other case, and
> > alternatives *always* handled the case where the first 'alternative'
> > instruction was a branch, didn't it?
> > 
> > So couldn't it just be alternative(nop, call __fill_rsb_func)?
> > 
> > But I still don't understand why it matters.
> 
> You need for both to be CALL instructions there so that gcc can manage
> the callee clobbers properly - i.e., recognize that there's a function
> call there.

Huh?  GCC doesn't even look inside the inline asm.  That's why we had to
implement ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT.

And the seg fault is objtool's way of telling you you need a
ANNOTATE_NOSPEC_ALTERNATIVE above the alternative ;-)

(I know that's not the best answer, will fix it soon.)

-- 
Josh