From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] objtool: Skip jump table jumps in the kCFI indirect call check
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2026 08:44:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261013064405.GY2009045@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261012183925.ca026d-kees@kernel.org>
On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 11:41:03AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 11:22:50AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > I am confused.. I don't see a computed goto in __bpf_prog_run(), and we
> > build with -fno-jump-tables.
>
> It's the interpreter, ___bpf_prog_run() (three underscores) in
Durr, clearly I wasn't wearing my glasses or something.
> kernel/bpf/core.c, not the __bpf_prog_run() wrapper in filter.h:
>
> static const void * const jumptable[256] __annotate_jump_table = {
> [0 ... 255] = &&default_label,
> ...
> };
> ...
> select_insn:
> goto *jumptable[insn->code];
>
> So it's a manually constructed jump table, not the "normal"
> table-from-switch stuff that -fno-jump-tables suppresses (though see
> below about Clang). objtool already knows about it, with annotations
> added back in 2019 in commit e55a73251da33 ("bpf: Fix ORC unwinding in
> non-JIT BPF code").
>
> With retpolines, GCC emits a single dispatch that every handler uses:
>
> movzbl (%rbx),%esi
> movzbl %sil,%edx
> mov jumptable(,%rdx,8),%rdx
> jmp __x86_indirect_thunk_rdx
>
> Clang never has this jump: with retpolines, LLVM's IndirectBrExpand pass
> turns the label addresses into indexes and the "goto *" into a switch,
> which Clang's -fno-jump-tables then makes a compare tree. So it's only
> constructed this way under GCC, but since now we can turn on kCFI with
> GCC, the objtool warning about indirects without kcfi protection trips.
OK, then the next question; do we *want* to allow a 'naked' indirect
branch to survive?
We can simply disable the whole interpreter when kcfi=y. Isn't that
thing recommended disabled anyway?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-13 6:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-12 9:04 [PATCH 0/3] x86/cfi: Fix a few kCFI issues found with GCC Kees Cook
2026-10-12 9:04 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86/kcfi: Decode the kCFI check from the trap address Kees Cook
2026-10-12 9:04 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86/kcfi: Emit the FineIBT paranoid "cs" prefix as a byte Kees Cook
2026-10-12 9:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-12 19:05 ` Andrew Cooper
2026-10-13 8:07 ` Kees Cook
2026-10-12 9:04 ` [PATCH 3/3] objtool: Skip jump table jumps in the kCFI indirect call check Kees Cook
2026-10-12 9:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-12 18:41 ` Kees Cook
2026-10-13 6:44 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2026-10-13 8:37 ` Kees Cook
2026-10-13 9:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-13 9:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20261013064405.GY2009045@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=justinstitt@google.com \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=morbo@google.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=samitolvanen@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.