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  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, 18 Jul 2015 10:40:02 -0500
From:	Josh Poimboeuf <>
To:	Borislav Petkov <>
Cc:	Andy Lutomirski <>,
	Ingo Molnar <>,
	Thomas Gleixner <>,
	Ingo Molnar <>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <>, Michal Marek <>,
	Peter Zijlstra <>,
	Andy Lutomirski <>,
	Linus Torvalds <>,
	Andi Kleen <>,
	Pedro Alves <>, X86 ML <>,,
	"" <>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 13/21] x86/asm/crypto: Fix frame pointer usage in

On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 04:25:25PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 08:46:55AM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > I like the balance, but the "ret" is still non-obvious.
> Does it have to be obvious?

I feel that making "ret" obvious is better.

But if somebody messes up and adds a second "ret", I suppose
stackvalidate would warn about the fact that it returned without
restoring the frame pointer.  So if there are no other objections, your
suggestion of ENTRY_FRAME and ENDPROC_FRAME is fine with me.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists