Re: [RFC PATCH 06/11] x86: make sure _etext includes function sections
From: Arvind Sankar
Date: Fri Feb 21 2020 - 18:05:16 EST
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 01:50:39PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 11:36:29AM -0500, Arvind Sankar wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 07:54:58AM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'll leave it to others to figure out the exact details. But afaict it
> > > > should be possible to have fine-grained-randomization and preserve the
> > > > workaround in the end.
> > > >
> > >
> > > the most obvious "solution" is to compile with an alignment of 4 bytes (so tight packing)
> > > and then in the randomizer preserve the offset within 32 bytes, no matter what it is
> > >
> > > that would get you an average padding of 16 bytes which is a bit more than now but not too insane
> > > (queue Kees' argument that tiny bits of padding are actually good)
> > >
> >
> > With the patchset for adding the mbranches-within-32B-boundaries option,
> > the section alignment gets forced to 32. With function-sections that
> > means function alignment has to be 32 too.
>
> We should be careful about enabling -mbranches-within-32B-boundaries.
> It will hurt AMD, and presumably future Intel CPUs which don't need it.
>
> --
> Josh
>
And past Intel CPUs too :) As I understand it only appears from Skylake
onwards.