linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86_64: ia32_signal.c: use macro instead of immediate

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: <487BD10F.2060408@ct.jp.nec.com>
Date:	Mon, 14 Jul 2008 15:19:59 -0700
From:	Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@...jp.nec.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: ia32_signal.c: use macro instead of immediate

H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Hiroshi Shimamoto wrote:
>> From: Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@...jp.nec.com>
>>
>> Make and use macro FIX_EFLAGS, instead of immediate value 0x40DD5 in
>> ia32_restore_sigcontext().
>>
>> +
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
>> +# define FIX_EFLAGS	(__FIX_EFLAGS | X86_EFLAGS_RF)
>> +#else
>> +# define FIX_EFLAGS	__FIX_EFLAGS
>> +#endif
>> +
> 
> Where did this come from?  First of all, this is in a 64-bit-only file, 
> so CONFIG_X86_32 will never be set; second of all, it seems a bit fishy 
> that these should be different.

It came from arch/x86/kernel/signal_64.c. (And signal_32.c has the same one.)
And yes, CONFIG_X86_32 is not set, I compiled and compare the results,
the macro was replaced by 0x40dd5, no RF.
I guess, someone made it same on signal_32.c and signal_64.c.

Thanks,
Hiroshi Shimamoto
--
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/