Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] kcfi: Prepare for GCC support

Peter Zijlstra
2025-09-05T02:19:14Z

On Thu, Sep 04, 2025 at 09:37:14AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2025 at 09:04:10AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 08:46:39PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> >
> > > Kees Cook (9):
> > > compiler_types.h: Move __nocfi out of compiler-specific header
> > > x86/traps: Clarify KCFI instruction layout
> > > x86/cfi: Document the "cfi=" bootparam options
> > > x86/cfi: Standardize on common "CFI:" prefix for CFI reports
> > > x86/cfi: Add "debug" option to "cfi=" bootparam
> > > x86/cfi: Remove __noinitretpoline and __noretpoline
> >
> > So I can take these first 6 patches (and edit that debug patch to
> > un-annoy myself ;-), but I'm thinking this Kconfig stuff:
>
> Sure, yeah. Do you want a v3 for the debug stuff that uses your proposed
> helper?

Nah, already done :-) I just pushed out these 6 and my UDB hackery to
queue.git/x86/core. If the robots don't complain, I'll stuff it into tip
in a few days.

> > > kconfig: Add transitional symbol attribute for migration support
> > > kcfi: Rename CONFIG_CFI_CLANG to CONFIG_CFI
> >
> > Should perhaps go through the kbuild tree? A
>
> I had chatted offline with Nathan about this series, and he'd suggested
> the kconfig change could go with it's first user (the rename). So if you
> don't want to put it in -tip, I can take it in the hardening tree.
> (There's no dependencies between these 2 and the first 6.)

So I suppose I can carry them, just to keep the lot together, but then I
need an ack from someone that actually knows this Kconfig language stuff
:-)

You taking them through the hardening tree also works for em.