linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86/hash: fix build failure with older binutils

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 24 Feb 2014 03:57:12 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>
CC:	davem@...emloft.net, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	tglx@...utronix.de, dborkman@...hat.com, ffusco@...hat.com,
	tgraf@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86/hash: fix build failure with older binutils

On 02/23/2014 11:56 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> 2.17 doesn't have support for it either, yet has support for fxsaveq
> (which you can see in the patch context we check for too). Apart
> from that Documentation/Changes continues to state binutils 2.12
> to be the minimum requirement...
>

Documentation/Changes (maybe) reflects the minimums across all 
architectures, which really has never applied to any single architecture 
for a long time.  x86 requires gcc 3.4 at a minimum, for example, and it 
is not clear that that is sufficient anymore, either.

We don't really have good documentation about what the requirements for 
various specific arches are...

That being said, it sounds like this one is justified.

	-hpa

--
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/