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.0.999.0711040943540.15101@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Sun, 4 Nov 2007 09:45:42 -0800 (PST)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...il.com>
cc:	Andrew Haley <aph@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Tomash Brechko <tomash.brechko@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Is gcc thread-unsafe?



On Sun, 4 Nov 2007, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> 
> Has it already been decided who will do this audit, and when this
> audit will happen ? Has a target date been set when this audit should
> be complete, or is the completion of this audit a requirement for the
> release of a specific gcc version ?

I am told that the gcc people realized that was indeed a bug (people were 
able to show problems even in non-threaded environments with mprotect()), 
and have now fixed it in the current gcc sources. That still leaves the 
old versions with potential problems, but I think it makes it much less 
interesting to audit for these things.

		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/