Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
Date:   Mon, 2 May 2022 21:55:25 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@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>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
        linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/21] KCFI support
Message-ID: <YnA3Le2uJRaFF4TC@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20220429203644.2868448-1-samitolvanen@google.com>
 <202204291545.47C6A97EA2@keescook>
 <Ymz7DWkRJy3PMaHm@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CABCJKuckt75qA1op-LpkJnQsJC36m9fstbY3uD=7pET2VyyZSg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CABCJKuckt75qA1op-LpkJnQsJC36m9fstbY3uD=7pET2VyyZSg@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, May 02, 2022 at 08:22:57AM -0700, Sami Tolvanen wrote:

> > Anyway, I think I hate that __builtin, I'd *much* rather see a variable
> > attribute or qualifier for this, such that one can mark a function
> > pointer as not doing CFI.
> >
> > I simply doesn't make sense to have a builtin that operates on an
> > expression. The whole thing is about indirect calls, IOW function
> > pointers.
> 
> I also thought an attribute would be more convenient, but the compiler
> folks prefer a built-in:
> 
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D122673

That seems to mostly worry about C++ things (overload sets, template
specialization, name mangling) we kernel folks don't seem to much care
about.

I'll stick with saying type system makes more sense to me though.