linux-kernel - Re: gcc-4.6.0 generates no code for sub_preempt

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]

Date:	Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:49:14 +0200
From:	Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se>
To:	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	user-mode-linux-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: gcc-4.6.0 generates no code for sub_preempt_count()

Richard Weinberger writes:
 > Hi,
 > 
 > I'm facing a very strange issue with gcc-4.6.0 and UML.
 > Within __local_bh_enable() gcc generates no code for sub_preempt_count().
 > 
 > See:
 > http://userweb.kernel.org/~rw/uml-gcc460/__local_bh_enable-gcc460.txt
 > vs.
 > http://userweb.kernel.org/~rw/uml-gcc460/__local_bh_enable-gcc431.txt
 > 
 > Interestingly it generates code for add_preempt_count().
 > I can reproduce this on x86 and x86_64.
 > 
 > The problem has to do with UML's current_thread_info() function.
 > When I replace it with arch/x86's (unportable) variant gcc generates code.
 > 
 > Any ideas whether this is a gcc or a kernel issue?

Please provide a standalone test case.
--
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/