linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] core kernel fixes

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:   Sun, 5 Nov 2017 12:12:31 -0800
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] core kernel fixes

On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> The GCC manual says:
>
>   "asm statements that have no output operands, including asm goto
>    statements, are implicitly volatile."

Hmm. Fair enough.

And the manual does say that it can merge and duplicate those asms
(and suggests using "%=" to generate a unique number, but I guess
"%c0" with __COUNTER__ is equivalent).

I think the gcc manual has changed. I'm pretty certain it used to say
that "volatile" asms would not be "moved significantly". They've
silently changed semantics before too, oh well.

              Linus