linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] X86-32: Let gcc decide whether to inline memcpy was Re: New x86 warning

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: <49EFC8FE.7010403@zytor.com>
Date:	Wed, 22 Apr 2009 18:48:46 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Joe Damato <ice799@...il.com>
CC:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] X86-32: Let gcc decide whether to inline memcpy was Re:
 	New x86 warning

Joe Damato wrote:
> 
> I think this patch is great. Perhaps this would be a good time to also
> clean out memset for x86_32? (If needed, I can start a new email
> thread with this patch) I've built and booted this on my x86_32
> hardware.
> 

Under the same conditions, i.e. making sure that with the oldest gcc we
still care about (3.2) we don't end up uninlining any new cases we
shouldn't.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
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/