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: <20181102235731.smqhskmxv5mu43qq@mail.google.com>
Date:   Fri, 2 Nov 2018 23:59:33 +0000
From:   Changbin Du <changbin.du@...il.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Changbin Du <changbin.du@...il.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 31 (vboxguest)

On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 04:54:25PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On 11/2/18, Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 11:32 PM Changbin Du <changbin.du@...il.com> wrote:
> >> On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 12:32:48PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> >
> > How about clang?
> >
> > For clang, -Og might be equivalent to -O1 at this moment, but I am not
> > sure.
> >
> > In my understanding, Clang does not inline functions marked with 'static
> > inline'
> > for -Og (or -O1) optimization level.
> >
> > Theoretically, 'inline' keyword is a just hint for the compiler, after all.
> 
> I think this means that we cannot build the kernel in that configuration,
> at least with CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y. Without that option,
> every 'inline' becomes 'always_inline'.
> 
>        Arnd
I have verified the new configuration with GCC. CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING is a
whole different thing and I dont think it is so aggressive. Because many of
kernel functions marked as 'inline' must be inlined. Otherwise the kernel cannot
be compiled at all with CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y. If you wanna to try, just
remove the 'inline' keyword from some kernel functions to see what happens.

-- 
Thanks,
Changbin Du

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ