linux-kernel - Re: Is gcc thread-unsafe?

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: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0710250744420.30120@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 25 Oct 2007 07:55:00 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Kleen, Andi" <ak@...e.de>
Subject: Re: Is gcc thread-unsafe?

On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:
> 
> Andi spotted this exchange on the gcc list. I don't think he's
> brought it up here yet, but it worries me enough that I'd like
> to discuss it.

Are you surprised?

The gcc developers seem to have had a total disregard for what people 
want or need, and every time some code generation issue comes up, there's 
a lot of people on the list that do language-lawyering, rather than admit 
that there might be a problem.

It's happened before, it will happen again. I don't think it's true of all 
gcc developers (or even most, I hope), but it's common enough. For some 
reason, compiler developers seem to be far enough removed from "real life" 
that they have a tendency to talk in terms of "this is what the spec says" 
rather than "this is a problem".

Happily, at least in this kind of situation, threading is a real issue for 
other projects than just the kernel, so maybe it gets solved properly.

But I have to admit that for the last five years or so, I've really wanted 
some other compiler team to come up with a good open-source compiler. 
Exactly due to issues like this (Q: "Gcc creates bogus code that doesn't 
work!" A: "It's not bogus, it's technically allowed by the language specs 
that don't talk about xyz, the fact that it doesn't work isn't our 
problem").

I think the OpenBSD people decided to actually do something about this, 
and I suspect it had *nothing* to do with license issues, and everything 
to do with these kinds of problems. I wish them all the luck, although 
personally I think LLVM is a much more interesting project.

			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/