coarse grained, hardware based, forward edge Control-Flow-Integrity mechanism
where any indirect CALL/JMP must target an ENDBR instruction or suffer #CP.
Additionally, since Alderlake (12th gen)/Sapphire-Rapids, speculation is
limited to 2 instructions (and typically fewer) on branch targets not starting
with ENDBR. CET-IBT also limits speculation of the next sequential instruction
after the indirect CALL/JMP [1].
CET-IBT is fundamentally incompatible with retpolines, but provides, as
described above, speculation limits itself.
[1] https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/software-security-guidance/technical-documentation/branch-history-injection.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=jZfK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Merge tag 'x86_core_for_5.18_rc1' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip
Pull x86 CET-IBT (Control-Flow-Integrity) support from Peter Zijlstra:
"Add support for Intel CET-IBT, available since Tigerlake (11th gen),
which is a coarse grained, hardware based, forward edge
Control-Flow-Integrity mechanism where any indirect CALL/JMP must
target an ENDBR instruction or suffer #CP.
Additionally, since Alderlake (12th gen)/Sapphire-Rapids, speculation
is limited to 2 instructions (and typically fewer) on branch targets
not starting with ENDBR. CET-IBT also limits speculation of the next
sequential instruction after the indirect CALL/JMP [1].
CET-IBT is fundamentally incompatible with retpolines, but provides,
as described above, speculation limits itself"
[1] https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/software-security-guidance/technical-documentation/branch-history-injection.html
* tag 'x86_core_for_5.18_rc1' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip: (53 commits)
kvm/emulate: Fix SETcc emulation for ENDBR
x86/Kconfig: Only allow CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT with ld.lld >= 14.0.0
x86/Kconfig: Only enable CONFIG_CC_HAS_IBT for clang >= 14.0.0
kbuild: Fixup the IBT kbuild changes
x86/Kconfig: Do not allow CONFIG_X86_X32_ABI=y with llvm-objcopy
x86: Remove toolchain check for X32 ABI capability
x86/alternative: Use .ibt_endbr_seal to seal indirect calls
objtool: Find unused ENDBR instructions
objtool: Validate IBT assumptions
objtool: Add IBT/ENDBR decoding
objtool: Read the NOENDBR annotation
x86: Annotate idtentry_df()
x86,objtool: Move the ASM_REACHABLE annotation to objtool.h
x86: Annotate call_on_stack()
objtool: Rework ASM_REACHABLE
x86: Mark __invalid_creds() __noreturn
exit: Mark do_group_exit() __noreturn
x86: Mark stop_this_cpu() __noreturn
objtool: Ignore extra-symbol code
objtool: Rename --duplicate to --lto
...
7001052160