linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: lse: fix LSE atomics with LLVM's integrated assembler

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:   Tue, 8 Oct 2019 08:22:07 -0700
From:   Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
To:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Murray <andrew.murray@....com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: lse: fix LSE atomics with LLVM's integrated assembler

On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 2:46 PM 'Nick Desaulniers' via Clang Built
Linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com> wrote:
> I'm worried that one of these might lower to LSE atomics without
> ALTERNATIVE guards by blanketing all C code with `-march=armv8-a+lse`.

True, that's a valid concern. I think adding the directive to each
assembly block is the way forward then, assuming the maintainers are
fine with that.

Sami