Re: [PATCH] retpoline/module: Taint kernel for missing retpoline in module

From: Andi Kleen
Date: Sat Jan 13 2018 - 13:21:05 EST


> > Also what's the point of putting this information into every symbol?
>
> It makes it easy to check :)

Easier than nm?

Per symbol still doesn't make any sense to me.

>
> > Once per module is good enough.
> >
> > We already have similar checks for staging etc.
>
> Sure, but this is more of a "Hey, your version of GCC is doing something
> different than what you built the kernel with, watch out!" which is much
> more generic and good to know. A whole taint for one CPU bug type seems
> overkill to me.

I removed the taint in version 2, posted yesterday. It now just prints
the warning and resets the vulnerability reporting in sysfs.

-Andi