linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] lib/vsprintf: add %pT format specifier

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:	Sat, 11 Jan 2014 11:30:22 +0900
From:	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To:	joe@...ches.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:	pavel@....cz, keescook@...omium.org, geert@...ux-m68k.org,
	jkosina@...e.cz, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, davem@...emloft.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/vsprintf: add %pT format specifier

Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-01-11 at 10:59 +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > I just added noinline_for_stack as with other functions does.
> > But indeed, stack used by name[] is only 16 bytes but stack used by function
> > arguments are larger than 16 bytes. We should remove noinline_for_stack ?
> 
> My recollection is that certain gcc versions don't do
> well with multiple inline functions that have stack
> variables.
> 
> Instead of collapsing the variables, gcc will
> accumulate the stack depth of all the inlines
> args instead of reusing the stack.
> 

I tried what commit cf3b429b "vsprintf.c: use noinline_for_stack" says
using gcc 4.4.7, but it made no difference for stack usage.
Thus, it seems harmless to keep noinline_for_stack keyword.
--
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/