linux-kernel - Re: [Suggestion] [x86]: Compiler Option Os is better on latest x86

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: <20130124152544.GA13504@pd.tnic>
Date:	Thu, 24 Jan 2013 16:25:44 +0100
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, ling.ma.program@...il.com,
	mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ma Ling <ling.ml@...pay.com>
Subject: Re: [Suggestion] [x86]: Compiler Option Os is better on latest x86

On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 08:56:26AM -0600, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> There has been occasional talk about a -Ok(ernel) option to gcc, but
> that would require someone to go through gcc and figure out what bits
> makes sense and which don't...

Yep, such an option has a great potential for us and, if done right,
would be very cool. It could probably be taught to insert HWEIGHT,
RDRAND, CLFLUSH and whatever other insns we have the inline asm versions
for... and query CPUID before that... uuh, nice stuff.

The alternative would be to fork gcc and call it kcc...

/me runs away pretty quickly without even turning back :-)

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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/