From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:59:35 +0100 > On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 12:34:34PM +0100, Alexander Lobakin wrote: > > > Re "won't do" -- sorry for trying to hijack this thread a bit, but > > did I miss something? The last comments I've read were that LLVM > > tools need to change their approach for CFI on x86, and Sami went > > redo it, but I can't recall any "life-time" nacks. > > Won't as in the lclang-cfi as it exists today. And I've understood that > this CFI model is a keeper. It is true that Sami has been working on an > alternative KCFI, but the little I can make of this proposal, it > still needs serious work. Also see here: > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220211133803.GV23216@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Specifically, I object to the existence of any __*cfi_check_fail symbol > on the grounds that it will bloat the code (and makes thinking about the > whole speculation angle more painful than it needs to be). Ah, I see, thanks! I've been tracking your IBT works, but missed LKML thread for some reason. I have no problems in dropping the related lines from my patch. Al
