linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Partially revert "compiler: enable CONFIG_OPTIMIZE

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 1 Oct 2019 18:12:06 +0100
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc:     arnd@...db.de, catalin.marinas@....com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux@...linux.org.uk, nsaenzjulienne@...e.de,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com,
        clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Partially revert "compiler: enable
 CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING forcibly"

On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 09:21:21AM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > So you'd prefer I do something like the diff below?
> 
> Yes, I find that diff preferable.  Use __always_inline only when absolutely
> necessary.  Even then, it sounds like this is a workaround for one compiler,
> so it should probably also have a comment. (I don't mind changing this for
> all compilers).

I wondered about a comment, but I couldn't find a good place to put it.
We basically need to say "If you're using explicit register variables in
your function, then you should use __always_inline", but there are other
functions too (such as arch/arm64/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h) so
a random comment buried in the atomic code doesn't feel very helpful to
me.

Will