| 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: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 11:41:43 -0700 From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, x86@...nel.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/10] x86/asm: Compile-time asm code validation Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> writes: > > If you're wanting something like -freorder-blocks-and-partition for asm > code, maybe we could implement something analagous to the > likely()/unlikely() macros, to allow the hot and cold portions to be > placed into different sections. (I could then teach asmvalidate how to > validate such code.) > > Would that be useful? Eventually you have to handle dwarf4, because that's the only way to handle the gcc generated code. So your tool just needs to understand the dwarf. It's ok to warn about assembler code that is not correctly annotated, and fix it then. -Andi -- ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only -- 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