linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] riscv: move GCC version check for ARCH_SUPPORTS

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]

Date:   Thu, 06 Sep 2018 02:45:03 -0700 (PDT)
From:   Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>
To:     yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com
CC:     aou@...s.berkeley.edu, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject:     Re: [PATCH] riscv: move GCC version check for ARCH_SUPPORTS_INT128 to Kconfig

On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 01:33:53 PDT (-0700), yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com wrote:
> This becomes much neater in Kconfig.
>
> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
> ---
>
>  arch/riscv/Kconfig  | 1 +
>  arch/riscv/Makefile | 2 --
>  2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/Kconfig b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
> index a344980..ed81df4 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
> @@ -112,6 +112,7 @@ config ARCH_RV32I
>  config ARCH_RV64I
>  	bool "RV64I"
>  	select 64BIT
> +	select ARCH_SUPPORTS_INT128 if GCC_VERSION >= 50000
>  	select HAVE_FUNCTION_TRACER
>  	select HAVE_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER
>  	select HAVE_FTRACE_MCOUNT_RECORD
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/Makefile b/arch/riscv/Makefile
> index 61ec424..33700e4 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/riscv/Makefile
> @@ -25,8 +25,6 @@ ifeq ($(CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I),y)
>
>  	KBUILD_CFLAGS += -mabi=lp64
>  	KBUILD_AFLAGS += -mabi=lp64
> -
> -	KBUILD_CFLAGS	+= $(call cc-ifversion, -ge, 0500, -DCONFIG_ARCH_SUPPORTS_INT128)
>
>  	KBUILD_MARCH = rv64im
>  	KBUILD_LDFLAGS += -melf64lriscv

FWIW, while there isn't an official RISC-V GCC port that old (IIRC 6 was our 
first version, but it may have been 7) there are out-of-tree ports so I think 
this is OK to leave as it stands.