linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix put

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.4.64.0701251747530.25027@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 25 Jan 2007 17:49:44 -0800 (PST)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix put_user for 64-bit constant



On Thu, 25 Jan 2007, Roland McGrath wrote:
>
> On x86-64, a put_user call using a 64-bit pointer and a constant value that
> is > 0xffffffff will produce code that doesn't assemble.  This patch fixes
> the asm construct to use the Z constraint for 32-bit constants.

Ahh. Will apply.

Just out of interest: did we have such code and it just happened to use a 
register, or was this found because you wrote some new code that triggered 
something that had just never been triggered before? Or is there a newer 
gcc that is better at optimizations and finds a constant propagation where 
it used to not find it?

Inquiring minds..

		Linus
-
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/