linux-kernel - Re: [2.6 patch] re-add -ffreestanding

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.4.64.0609070245100.6761@scrub.home>
Date:	Thu, 7 Sep 2006 02:47:42 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
To:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>
cc:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] re-add -ffreestanding

Hi,

On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:

> > BS, even without it gcc can't make such assumption.
> > There is not a single optimization, which would be invalid in a kernel 
> > environment and would be "fixed" by this option, so please stop this 
> > nonsense.
> 
> You are wrong.
> 
> Section 5.1.2.2.2 of ISO/IEC 9899:1999 says:
> In a hosted environment, a program may use all functions, macros, type 
> definitions, and objects described in the library clause (clause 7).
> 
> Since a hosted environment means gcc+libc, it's therefore clear that gcc 
> can assume the presence of a full libc if gcc isn't told that it's used 
> as a freestanding environment.

Define "full libc".
Explain what exactly -ffreestanding fixes, which is not valid for the 
kernel.

byem Roman
-
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/