linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: Do not allow unaligned accesses when CONFIG_ALIGNMENT

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, 26 May 2011 22:26:07 +0100
From:	Måns Rullgård <mans@...sr.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Måns Rullgård 
	<mans@...sr.com>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, sam@...nborg.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: Do not allow unaligned accesses when CONFIG_ALIGNMENT_TRAP

Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com> writes:

>> It is possible that -fconserve-stack is still valuable on ARM given that
>> it is also used with -mno-unaligned-access for other things than
>> structure packing on the stack, and therefore its merits can be debated
>> independently from the alignment issue at hand.
>
> The big advantage of -fconserve-stack is that it throttles the inliner
> if the inlining would cause too much stack growth. This is something
> you likely want on ARM too, especially as code gets more and more
> complex.

Is there no way to get that effect without also activating the
aggressive packing?

-- 
Måns Rullgård
mans@...sr.com
--
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/