linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 08/15] arm64: don't pass -maarch64linux to GNU gold

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 6 Nov 2017 08:56:40 -0800
From:   Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
To:     Yury Norov <ynorov@...iumnetworks.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Greg Hackmann <ghackmann@...gle.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/15] arm64: don't pass -maarch64linux to GNU gold

On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 11:41:57PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote:
> Also, IIUC, this patch is not related to LTO, because if ld.gold doesn't
> recognize -maarch64linux with LTO, it will not recognize it in non-LTO
> build. Am I right?

That's correct. ld.gold --help says -m is obsolete, but at the same time,
it supports a number of emulations, just with different names than ld.bfd.
I'll take a closer look at this and see if there's a different flag we
should be passing here instead. Looks like I also have some 0-day issues
to address for v2.

Sami