linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: always_inline wrapper for x86's test

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

Date:	Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:34:57 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...tmail.fm>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...lshack.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: always_inline wrapper for x86's test_bit

> Checked with a stock 3.2.3 form gcc.gnu.org (compiled using debian's
> gcc-2.95). It gets it right: places that should get the C version get
> the C version and places that should get the inline-assembly version
> get the inline-assembly version. No funny things at all.

Great. Thanks for testing. Perhaps the problem was limited to 2.9x only.

> B.T.W., debian and ubuntu don't provide gcc-3.2 packages. Is there a
> good reason why gcc-3.2.3 (5 years old in a week) should still be
> supported?

The compiler version is normally only moved up when there is some 
bug in an older version that cannot be reasonably be worked around.
So far 3.2 didn't have anything like this, at least not on x86
(on some other architectures there are problems with older toolkits) 

-Andi
--
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/