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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20190416170808.GC54708@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com> Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 18:08:09 +0100 From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Alex Matveev <alxmtvv@...il.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>, Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, Yury Norov <ynorov@...iumnetworks.com>, Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>, Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] arm64: sysreg: make mrs_s and msr_s macros work with Clang and LTO On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 10:22:27AM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 10:06 AM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> wrote: > > It would be nice if we could simply rely on a more recent binutils these > > days, which supports the generic S<op0>_<op1>_<cn>_<Cm>_<op2> sysreg > > definition. That would mean we could get rid of the whole msr_s/mrs_s > > hack by turning that into a CPP macro which built that name. > > > > It looks like binutils has been able to do that since September 2014... > > > > Are folk using toolchains older than that to compile kernels? > > Do you have a link to a commit? If we can pinpoint the binutils > version, that might help. IIUC any version of binutils with commit: df7b4545b2b49572 ("[PATCH/AArch64] Generic support for all system registers using mrs and msr") ... should be sufficent. That's on gitweb at: https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=df7b4545b2b49572ab63690c130df973af109615 > Also, I look forward to this patch for use of Clang's integrated > assembler (regardless of LTO). I remember getting frustrated trying > to figure out how to resolve this for both assemblers, and I had > forgotten this solution existed. Is this the only blocker for the integrated assembler? Thanks, Mark.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists