On Fri, 2018-03-09 at 02:05 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Sat, 2018-03-03 at 20:40 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > On Sat, 2018-03-03 at 11:07 -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 03, 2018 at 03:22:14PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > > > > > > I think that backporting gcc-4.9 and building the kernel with it (for > > > > x86) is lower risk than backporting the retpoline patches to gcc-4.7 > > > > and building the kernel with that. (In fact it's not just the kernel; > > > > if you change gcc-4.7 that has the potential to affect most updates to > > > > wheezy, even though use of retpoline should be disabled by defaul.) > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for clarifying. > > > > > > I will work on backporting your patched gcc-4.9 to wheezy. Should I also > > > start working on getting the wheezy kernel building with gcc-4.9? I > > > understand that an upload must wait for the kernel microde update you > > > mentioned previously. > > > > I can handle the kernel changes. I've pushed a new branch > > (wheezy-security-retpoline) to > > https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/kernel/linux.git/ > > > > This builds with gcc-4.9 from jessie. However it doesn't (yet) > > actually enable use of retpoline. > > I'm now working on backporting Spectre mitigations to the 3.16 and 3.2 > stable branches. The repository has now moved to https://salsa.debian.org/kernel-team/linux.git I released Linux 3.2.101 today with a backport of the retpoline changes, and have rebased that branch onto it. The new orig tarball is at https://people.debian.org/~benh/linux_3.2.101.orig.tar.xz I was able to build this branch for amd64 using gcc-4.9 from jessie, and it reports full retpoline support. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings The first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part