linux-kernel - Re: x86 setup code rewrite in C

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <590581.39283.qm@web26913.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
Date:	Fri, 13 Jul 2007 16:42:02 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Etienne Lorrain <etienne_lorrain@...oo.fr>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: x86 setup code rewrite in C - revised

Andi wrote:
> The only thing questionable is that .code16gcc is arguably quite
> an abuse of gcc. I even checked with some gcc developers 
> and they weren't too happy about it. e.g. it's not regression
> tested at all so we would be basically on our own with it.

 On the other hand GCC just produces an assembly text file, it is
not the GCC developper problem what the user does with this text file.
Usually it goes to the assembler with standard options - .code16gcc
is a "special" option - and bugs (if there is) should be forwarded to binutils.
 GCC tries to go around CPU bugs, and those bug may be different in
protected or real mode - but I still do not have one example of such
a bug.
 GCC also has a base library support (multiplication & divisions of
64 bits...), and when you use .code16gcc you know you cannot touch it
(it is assembled with .code32); so that management may be what they
are refering to.

 Etienne.

      _____________________________________________________________________________ 
Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos mails vers Yahoo! Mail 
-
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/