On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 11:35:25AM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> If they have explicit asm which has indirect jumps, that would still be
> a problem. We just need to port objtool into the kernel and do it at
> module load time, to check for that... :)
Darnit, you sniffed out my April Fool's
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 11:35:25AM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> If they have explicit asm which has indirect jumps, that would still be
> a problem. We just need to port objtool into the kernel and do it at
> module load time, to check for that... :)
Darnit, you sniffed out my April Fool's
On Mon, 2018-01-29 at 12:19 +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
>
> The whole thing works:
>
> % grep . /sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities/*
>
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities/meltdown:Mitigation: PTI
>
On Mon, 2018-01-29 at 12:19 +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
>
> The whole thing works:
>
> % grep . /sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities/*
>
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities/meltdown:Mitigation: PTI
>
Martin Steigerwald - 29.01.18, 11:42:
> > Try removing .cache.mk which has 'remembered' that your GCC doesn't
> > support retpoline.
>
> I bet there have been "*.cache.mk" files around from previous pre gcc-7.3
> compiles.
>
> Trying again after
>
> % find -name ".cache.mk" -delete
>
> on
Martin Steigerwald - 29.01.18, 11:42:
> > Try removing .cache.mk which has 'remembered' that your GCC doesn't
> > support retpoline.
>
> I bet there have been "*.cache.mk" files around from previous pre gcc-7.3
> compiles.
>
> Trying again after
>
> % find -name ".cache.mk" -delete
>
> on
David Woodhouse - 29.01.18, 10:53:
> On Mon, 2018-01-29 at 10:41 +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > From what I read gcc 7.3 was supposed to include back ported retpoline
> > patches. What am I missing here?
>
> Which did you update first? Kernel source or GCC?
Kernel source is existing git
David Woodhouse - 29.01.18, 10:53:
> On Mon, 2018-01-29 at 10:41 +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > From what I read gcc 7.3 was supposed to include back ported retpoline
> > patches. What am I missing here?
>
> Which did you update first? Kernel source or GCC?
Kernel source is existing git
On Mon, 2018-01-29 at 10:41 +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> From what I read gcc 7.3 was supposed to include back ported retpoline
> patches. What am I missing here?
Which did you update first? Kernel source or GCC?
Try removing .cache.mk which has 'remembered' that your GCC doesn't
support
On Mon, 2018-01-29 at 10:41 +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> From what I read gcc 7.3 was supposed to include back ported retpoline
> patches. What am I missing here?
Which did you update first? Kernel source or GCC?
Try removing .cache.mk which has 'remembered' that your GCC doesn't
support
Hi Linus, hi everyone,
Linus Torvalds - 28.01.18, 22:52:
> details), and perhaps equally importantly, to actually get the biggest
> fix for the indirect branch mitigations, you need not just the kernel
> updates, you need to have a compiler with support for the "retpoline"
> indirect branch
Hi Linus, hi everyone,
Linus Torvalds - 28.01.18, 22:52:
> details), and perhaps equally importantly, to actually get the biggest
> fix for the indirect branch mitigations, you need not just the kernel
> updates, you need to have a compiler with support for the "retpoline"
> indirect branch
12 matches
Mail list logo
