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  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:   Tue, 26 Mar 2019 18:03:59 +0100 (CET)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
cc:     x86@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/17] x86, lto: Mark all top level asm statements as
 .text

Andi,

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019, Andi Kleen wrote:

> With gcc 8 toplevel assembler statements that do not mark themselves
> as .text may end up in other sections.

Which is clearly a change in behaviour. Is that intended or just yet
another feature of GCC?

Your subject says: 'x86, lto:'

So is this a LTO related problem or is the section randomization
independent of LTO?

This wants to be clearly documented in the changelog.

Aside of that the proper Subject prefix is either:

    x86/asm/lto:

or

    x86/asm:

dependent on the nature. Like it or not, but this has been the prefix x86
uses for a very long time already.

> I had boot crashes because
> various assembler statements ended up in the middle of the initcall
> section.
> 
> Always mark all the top level assembler statements as text
> so that they switch to the right section.
> 
> For AMD "vide", which is only used on 32bit kernels, I also
> marked it as 32bit only.

Once more. See

  https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#describe-your-changes

  "Describe your changes in imperative mood, e.g. “make xyzzy do frotz”
  instead of “[This patch] makes xyzzy do frotz” or “[I] changed xyzzy to
  do frotz”, as if you are giving orders to the codebase to change its
  behaviour."

This is the last time, I'm asking for this.
 
Thanks,

	tglx

Powered by blists - more mailing lists