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:   Mon, 12 Feb 2018 18:05:10 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Ulf Magnusson <ulfalizer@...il.com>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
        "Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
        Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "Van De Ven, Arjan" <arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/7] kconfig: support new special property shell=

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 08:56:31AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> That would be bad: Android exclusively builds with clang.

So implement asm-goto already, and do asm-cc-output while you're at it.

The whole asm-goto/jump_label stuff really does make a measureable
difference in performance, and its bloody rediculous LLVM doesn't have
it.

And no, a different interface to do something similar is not OK. We're
not going to have a second implementation of jump-labels and everything
else that uses it.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ