On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 09:28:56AM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 03:34:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > There are the retpoline validation patches; they work with the __noretpoline > > thing from David. > > Have you run this through 0-day bot yet?
Yes, it complains a _lot_ because no retpoline supported compiler. > A manual awk/sed found another > one, which objtool confirms: > > drivers/watchdog/.tmp_hpwdt.o: warning: objtool: .text+0x24: indirect call > found in RETPOLINE build That is the only known one left. It calls into BIOS code, so its not safe and using a retpoline for it is pointless since nobody audited the BIOS code.
