Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev
2018-Feb-07 22:00 UTC
[llvm-dev] retpoline mitigation and 6.0
Quick response to a detail, I'll respond to more of this when i have more time. On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 1:55 PM David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> wrote:> OK... which __x86_indirect_thunk* symbols *are* being used by Clang in > 32-bit mode?__x86_indirect_thunk __x86_indirect_thunk_eax __x86_indirect_thunk_ecx __x86_indirect_thunk_edx> I've added __x86_indirect_thunk for 32-bit now, and if > that's *all* the Clang is using then I'll possibly switch GCC into that > mode too. > > Can you take care of filing the tickets for %V0 and "=q" > and attribute__((indirect_branch("keep"))) please? With those fixed, I > think we should be OK again.-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180207/57454d18/attachment.html>
David Woodhouse via llvm-dev
2018-Feb-07 22:11 UTC
[llvm-dev] retpoline mitigation and 6.0
On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 22:00 +0000, Chandler Carruth wrote:> > On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 1:55 PM David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> > wrote: > > OK... which __x86_indirect_thunk* symbols *are* being used by Clang > > in > > 32-bit mode? > __x86_indirect_thunk > __x86_indirect_thunk_eax > __x86_indirect_thunk_ecx > __x86_indirect_thunk_edxThanks. And you'll *never* do __x86_indirect_thunk (the ret-equivalent one) on 64-bit, right? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 5213 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180207/948cc612/attachment.bin>
Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev
2018-Feb-07 22:17 UTC
[llvm-dev] retpoline mitigation and 6.0
On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 2:11 PM David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> wrote:> On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 22:00 +0000, Chandler Carruth wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 1:55 PM David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> > > wrote: > > > OK... which __x86_indirect_thunk* symbols *are* being used by Clang > > > in > > > 32-bit mode? > > __x86_indirect_thunk > > __x86_indirect_thunk_eax > > __x86_indirect_thunk_ecx > > __x86_indirect_thunk_edx > > Thanks. And you'll *never* do __x86_indirect_thunk (the ret-equivalent > one) on 64-bit, right?Correct. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180207/7e10c0cf/attachment.html>