linux-kernel - Re: sparc vs. gcc 4.3

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: <20080303.140203.201465683.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 03 Mar 2008 14:02:03 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	harvey.harrison@...il.com
Cc:	bunk@...nel.org, wli@...omorphy.com, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: sparc vs. gcc 4.3

From: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 13:41:11 -0800

> Could you hide the asm inside an actual function and annotate the
> function with __used?

Won't work, the asm needs to be inlined because it needs to:

1) Know where local variables are located

2) Has to run in the context of the stack frame the
   call site runs in so that the tail-call it's doing works

And actually all of this is why the sparc64 fix turned out to
be so invasive, and I'll need to do the same for sparc32
as a result.
--
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/