Re: [PATCH 1/8] x86,kcfi: Fix EXPORT_SYMBOL vs kCFI

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Tue, Nov 05, 2024 at 12:39:02PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> The expectation is that all EXPORT'ed symbols are free to have their
> address taken and called indirectly.

I don't think that is the case at all.  The is a relatively small number
of exported symbols that are called indirectly.  I'd much rather mark
those explicitly.