linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: support i386 with Clang

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:   Mon, 11 May 2020 11:46:09 -0700
From:   Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
To:     Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Dmitry Golovin <dima@...ovin.in>,
        Dennis Zhou <dennis@...nel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: support i386 with Clang

On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 11:09 AM Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com> wrote:
> This looks like the same issue that we just discussed for bitops.h.
> Add the "b" operand size modifier to force it to use the 8-bit
> register names (and probably also needs the "w" modifier in the 16-bit
> case).

While it does feel familiar, it is slightly different.
https://godbolt.org/z/Rme4Zg
That case was both compilers validating the inline asm, yet generating
assembly that the assembler would choke on.  This case is validation
in the front end failing.

Side note: would you mind sending a review by tag for v5 of that patch
if you think it's good to go?  It does fix a regression I'd prefer
didn't ship in 5.7.
-- 
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers