Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "noretpoline".
Did you mean:
mretpoline
2018 Feb 09
2
retpoline mitigation and 6.0
...[ 0.000000] At line 425, gsi_base is -1043715332
[ 0.000000] At line 427, gsi_base is -1043715332
http://git.infradead.org/users/dwmw2/linux-retpoline.git/shortlog/refs/heads/clang
http://david.woodhou.se/clang32.config
http://david.woodhou.se/io_apic_b.i
http://david.woodhou.se/io_apic_b.noretpoline.s
http://david.woodhou.se/io_apic_b.retpoline.s
I don't *think* I screwed up copying and pasting the retpoline thunk.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 5213 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <...
2018 Feb 09
0
retpoline mitigation and 6.0
...715332
> [ 0.000000] At line 427, gsi_base is -1043715332
>
> http://git.infradead.org/users/dwmw2/linux-retpoline.git/shortlog/ref
> s/heads/clang
> http://david.woodhou.se/clang32.config
>
>
> http://david.woodhou.se/io_apic_b.i
> http://david.woodhou.se/io_apic_b.noretpoline.s
> http://david.woodhou.se/io_apic_b.retpoline.s
>
> I don't *think* I screwed up copying and pasting the retpoline thunk.
So, looking at the retpoline version...
gsi_base is in %edi, and gets spilled to the stack at about .Ltmp22
which is at line 412 right after the printk call:...
2018 Feb 09
3
retpoline mitigation and 6.0
...7, gsi_base is -1043715332
> >
> > http://git.infradead.org/users/dwmw2/linux-retpoline.git/shortlog/ref
> > s/heads/clang
> > http://david.woodhou.se/clang32.config
> >
> >
> > http://david.woodhou.se/io_apic_b.i
> > http://david.woodhou.se/io_apic_b.noretpoline.s
> > http://david.woodhou.se/io_apic_b.retpoline.s
> >
> > I don't *think* I screwed up copying and pasting the retpoline thunk.
>
> So, looking at the retpoline version...
>
> gsi_base is in %edi, and gets spilled to the stack at about .Ltmp22
> which is at li...
2018 Feb 09
0
retpoline mitigation and 6.0
On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 08:45 +0000, Chandler Carruth wrote:
> >
> > You're pushing the target (-0x20(%ebp)) onto the stack and then
> > *calling* __x86_indirect_thunk. So it looks like you're expecting
> > __x86_indirect_thunk to do something like
> >
> > call *4(%esp)
> > ret
> >
> > ... except that final 'ret' still
2018 Feb 09
2
retpoline mitigation and 6.0
On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 12:26 AM David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 02:21 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 01:18 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > For now I'm just going to attempt to work around it like this in the
> > > kernel, so I can concentrate on the