linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 04/10] x86: refcount: prevent gcc distortions

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, 4 Oct 2018 10:56:06 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     hpa@...or.com
Cc:     Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 04/10] x86: refcount: prevent gcc distortions

* hpa@...or.com <hpa@...or.com> wrote:

> It's not just for working around a stupid GCC bug, but it also has a huge potential for 
> cleaning up the inline asm in general.

Sorry but that's just plain false. For example this patch:

   x86: cpufeature: use macros instead of inline assembly

... adds an extra macro indirection layer called STATIC_CPU_HAS, just to macrofy a single asm() 
statement that was perfectly readable and on-topic already...

There are some other cases where macrofying is also a cleanup due to sharing and naming a 
common pattern of code, but this is by no means an absolute quality of this approach.

Thanks,

	Ingo