Re: [PATCH v2] Linux VM workaround for Knights Landing A/D leak

[H. Peter Anvin]

On June 14, 2016 2:02:55 PM PDT, Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 01:54:25PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> There was that.  It is still possible that we end up with NOP a JMP
>> right before another JMP; we could perhaps make the patching code
>> smarter and see if we have a JMP immediately after.
>
>Yeah, I still can't get reproduce that reliably - I remember seeing it
>at some point but then dismissing it for another, higher-prio thing.
>And
>now the whole memory is hazy at best.
>
>But, you're giving me a great idea right now - I have this kernel
>disassembler tool which dumps alternative sections already and I could
>teach it to look for pathological cases around the patching sites and
>scream.
>
>Something for my TODO list when I get a quiet moment.
>
>Thanks!

We talked with the GCC people about always bias asm goto toward the first label even if followed by __builtin_unreachable().  I don't know if that happened; if so we should probably insert the unreachable for those versions of gcc only.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse brevity and formatting.