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]
Message-ID: <bd57d7d5-c8f5-0bc9-c96f-37550557dca3@users.sourceforge.net>
Date:   Sun, 3 Dec 2017 22:56:51 +0100
From:   SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...marydata.com>
Subject: Re: Difficulties for compilation without extra optimisation

> Why would you compile the kernel without optimization?

I would like to see how big an effect finally is in such a build configuration
after specific source code adjustments.


> There's many places in the kernel that WILL NOT BUILD without optimization.

I did not really know this detail so far.

I noticed that the optimised build variants worked during my test comparisons.


> In fact, we do a lot of tricks to make sure that things work the way
> we expect it to, because we add broken code that only gets compiled out
> when gcc optimizes the code the way we expect it to be,
> and the kernel build will break otherwise.

Thanks for your information.

Can the software areas distinguished where such special handling matters?

Regards,
Markus

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ