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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 08:38:23 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jkenisto@...ibm.com, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, ananth@...ibm.com, anton@...hat.com, masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com, acme@...radead.org, oleg@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@....ibm.com>, Josh Stone <jistone@...hat.com>, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [tip:perf/uprobes] uprobes/core: Clean up, refactor and improve the code * Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > The volatiles were added to arch/x86/kernel/kprobes.c because > of commit 7115e3fcf45 and 315eb8a2a1b. The volatiles are > required because gcc 4.6 gave a warning about the asm operand > for test_bit. So the same were added to > arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c. Seems like a GCC bug - a bogus warning - or does it generate bad code as well? In any case, kprobes.c did it correctly, it added the volatile *and a comment*, pointing out that it's a GCC bug. No such warning was added to uprobes.c, making the volatile look entirely spurious. So feel free to re-add the volatile in a followup patch, just make sure the GCC workaround nature is documented. Thanks, Ingo -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists