linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86_32: Fix module version table mismatch.

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:	Tue, 23 Apr 2013 18:41:01 +0300
From:	Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
	arjan <arjan@...radead.org>,
	"james.hogan" <james.hogan@...tec.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_32: Fix module version table mismatch.

On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 6:17 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 04/23/2013 05:40 AM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>>
>> -#define memcmp __builtin_memcmp
>> +int memcmp(const void *cs, const void *ct, size_t count);
>>
>
> Yuck.  I really don't like this option unless it truly can't be
> avoided... it might be a fix for 3.9/stable but a better way to do this
> would be much more appreciated.

What about my proposal to supply parameters for __builtin_memcmp in
memcmp macro.

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
--
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/