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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 11:39:43 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> CC: Satyam Sharma <ssatyam@....iitk.ac.in>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] i386: bitops: Rectify bogus "Ir" constraints Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Satyam Sharma wrote: >> * The "I" constraint modifier is applicable only to immediate-value operands, >> and combining it with "r" is bogus. > > This is wrong too. > > The whole point of a "Ir" modifier is to say that the instruction takes > *either* an "I" or an "r". > > Andrew - the ones I've looked at were all wrong. Please don't take this > series. > Incidentally, I just noticed the x86-64 bitops have "dIr" as their constraint set. "d" would normally be redundant with "r", and as far as I know, gcc doesn't prefer one over the other without having "?" or "!" as part of the constraint, so is is "d" a stray or is there some meaning behind it? -hpa - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists