[llvm-dev] retpoline mitigation and 6.0
David Woodhouse via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Sat Feb 3 06:36:48 PST 2018
On Sat, 2018-02-03 at 01:08 +0000, Chandler Carruth wrote:
> Sure, I can see why for the kernel, this is important. It also gets
> to essentially define its ABI however it wants.
> For our other users, they specifically don't want this in the ABI
> (because they actually have DSOs and other junk being linked
> together). And yes, we actually have a decent number of users of this
> in userspace and outside the kernel. =/
Using the *external* thunk in order to provide their own? While
claiming it isn't an ABI? That seems... odd.
Nobody cares what you call it when you're doing it inline or in a
COMDAT section. It's *only* the external thunk where it absolutely
*does* become an ABI, where we care about consistency.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 5213 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the llvm-dev