On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 10:24:23AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 12:02:36PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > Also, in the shiny new era of > > Intel-CPUs-can’t-handle-Jcc-spanning-a-cacheline, function alignment > > may actually matter. > > *groan*, indeed. I just went and looked that up. I missed this one in > all the other fuss :/ > > So per: > > https://www.intel.com/content/dam/support/us/en/documents/processors/mitigations-jump-conditional-code-erratum.pdf > > the toolchain mitigations only work if the offset in the ifetch window > (32 bytes) is preserved. Which seems to suggest we ought to align all > functions to 32byte before randomizing it, otherwise we're almost > guaranteed to change this offset by the act of randomizing. Wheee! This sounds like in needs to be fixed generally, yes? (And I see "FUNCTION_ALIGN" macro is currently 16 bytes... -- Kees Cook
