linux-kernel - Re: ASM flags in general

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Mon, 27 Jul 2015 16:58:29 -0700
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
	Uros Bizjak <uros_bizjak1@....net>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: ASM flags in general

On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 4:56 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> Sure... but now you have to wrap things in stac/clac.  I'm not sure I see the point since the code is already pretty much optimal.

Ick.  I forgot about that.

It would benefit all the users who aren't using the _ex functions,
though.  And, if there are enough of those, it just might be worth
trying to postprocess object files to collapse adjacent stac and clac
instances, or just to teach the alternatives code to nop them out if
they're redundant.

--Andy
--
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/