| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <m1iqvpffi2.fsf@frodo.ebiederm.org> Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:42:29 -0700 From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Mike Travis <travis@....com>, Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [crash, bisected] Re: [PATCH 3/4] x86_64: Fold pda into per cpu area Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> writes: > ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman) writes: >> >> Has anyone investigated using the technique gcc uses for thread local storage? > > I investigated a long time ago (given when the binutils/gcc support > was much more primitive) and my conclusion back then was that doing > the same for kernel module (negative addresses) would need > new relocation types. And the pain of a binutils change didn't > seem worth it. Thanks. That does seem to be the fly in the ointment of using the builtin linker support. The kernel lives at negative addresses which is necessary but weird. If the @tpoff relocation doesn't work for us we clearly can't use the support. I will have to look and see if usable relocation types are generated from @tpoff. Eric -- 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