linux-kernel - Re: Unnecessary Relocation Hiding?

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]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608241125140.4394@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date:	Thu, 24 Aug 2006 11:26:42 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	Dong Feng <middle.fengdong@...il.com>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ak@...e.de
Subject: Re: Unnecessary Relocation Hiding?

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Dong Feng wrote:

> I have a question. Why shall we need a RELOC_HIDE() macro in the
> definition of per_cpu()? Maybe the question is actually why we need
> macro RELOC_HIDE() at all. I changed the following line in
> include/asm-generic/percpu.h, from

Guess it was copied from IA64 but the semantics were not preserved.
I think it should either be changed the way you suggest or the 
implementation needs to be fixed to actually do a linker relocation.
-
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/