linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] __builtin

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 09 Sep 2009 23:42:34 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...nel.org>
To:	Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
CC:	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jakub Jelinek <jakub@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] __builtin_unreachable

On 09/09/2009 09:42 PM, Américo Wang wrote:
> 
> Just curious, what different asm code will gcc generate for this? Comparing it
> to for(;;) ? I am sorry that I don't have gcc 4.5 on hand.
> 

It generates nothing.  It is you as the programmer guaranteeing that we
will never get there, and as such gcc will generate no code at all.

	-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/