Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 2 Sep 2022 09:51:41 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>
Cc:     Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        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 <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/21] KCFI support
Message-ID: <YxG2DUEBnIpAMKF2@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20220830233129.30610-1-samitolvanen@google.com>
 <YxEh+pLyOyPalW1u@dev-arch.thelio-3990X>
 <CABCJKucP5nXGiCTTCEPUGYo5Z9A9qaQkJ6_kXTOfw-o-=TYH0g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CABCJKucP5nXGiCTTCEPUGYo5Z9A9qaQkJ6_kXTOfw-o-=TYH0g@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 05:33:29PM -0700, Sami Tolvanen wrote:

> > I do see a few new objtool warnings as well:
> >
> > vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: apply_relocate_add+0x34: relocation to !ENDBR: memcpy+0x0
> > vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: ___ksymtab+__memcpy+0x0: data relocation to !ENDBR: memcpy+0x0
> > vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: ___ksymtab+memcpy+0x0: data relocation to !ENDBR: memcpy+0x0
> 
> That's interesting. I can only reproduce this warning with
> allmodconfig+LTO, even though the relocation exists in all builds (the
> code makes an indirect call to memcpy) and memcpy (aliased to
> __memcpy) doesn't start with endbr. I'll have to take a closer look at
> why this warning only appears with LTO.

From just looking at the patches I'd say patch #19 breaks it. IIRC you
forgot to make the SYM_TYPED_FUNC things emit ENDBR.

Look at how x86/asm/linkage.h is overriding SYM_FUNC_START*().

You might have the same bug vs ARM64 BTI, they do the same thing.