4.4-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Waiman Long <[email protected]>

commit 1df37383a8aeabb9b418698f0bcdffea01f4b1b2 upstream.

It doesn't make sense to have an indirect call thunk with esp/rsp as
retpoline code won't work correctly with the stack pointer register.
Removing it will help compiler writers to catch error in case such
a thunk call is emitted incorrectly.

Fixes: 76b043848fd2 ("x86/retpoline: Add initial retpoline support")
Suggested-by: Jeff Law <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Acked-by: David Woodhouse <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lendacky <[email protected]>
Cc: Kees Cook <[email protected]>
Cc: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
Cc: Tim Chen <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
Cc: Jiri Kosina <[email protected]>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <[email protected]>
Cc: Dave Hansen <[email protected]>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <[email protected]>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
Cc: Paul Turner <[email protected]>
Link: 
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <[email protected]>
[jwang: cherry pick to 4.4]
Signed-off-by: Jack Wang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
---
 arch/x86/include/asm/asm-prototypes.h |    1 -
 arch/x86/lib/retpoline.S              |    1 -
 2 files changed, 2 deletions(-)

--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/asm-prototypes.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/asm-prototypes.h
@@ -37,5 +37,4 @@ INDIRECT_THUNK(dx)
 INDIRECT_THUNK(si)
 INDIRECT_THUNK(di)
 INDIRECT_THUNK(bp)
-INDIRECT_THUNK(sp)
 #endif /* CONFIG_RETPOLINE */
--- a/arch/x86/lib/retpoline.S
+++ b/arch/x86/lib/retpoline.S
@@ -36,7 +36,6 @@ GENERATE_THUNK(_ASM_DX)
 GENERATE_THUNK(_ASM_SI)
 GENERATE_THUNK(_ASM_DI)
 GENERATE_THUNK(_ASM_BP)
-GENERATE_THUNK(_ASM_SP)
 #ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
 GENERATE_THUNK(r8)
 GENERATE_THUNK(r9)


Reply via email to