linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: code improvement of check_stack_guard

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: <AANLkTik0qJ_Nd7YLii0dm6z-sbwqHLxURPaWVRKDtUSA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 15 Aug 2010 10:58:36 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	jovi zhang <bookjovi@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: code improvement of check_stack_guard_page

On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 10:15 PM, jovi zhang <bookjovi@...il.com> wrote:
>
> little code improvement of check_stack_guard_page function.
> this commit is on top of commit "mm: keep a guard page below a
> grow-down stack segment" of linus.

I don't think your patch is in any way wrong, but I just checked, and
it makes absolutely zero difference to the code generation at least
for my version of gcc. The resulting assembly is identical except for
the line numbers that changed (BUG_ON() line/file information and
debug information).

So I think I prefer the shallower indentation.

                       Linus
--
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/