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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Sat, 4 Jul 2020 14:09:42 +0200
From:   Björn Töpel <>
To:     Emil Renner Berthing <>
Cc:     linux-riscv <>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <>,
        Paul Walmsley <>,
        Anup Patel <>,
        Atish Patra <>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <>
Subject: Re: [RFC] riscv: Add jump-label implementation

On Sat, 4 Jul 2020 at 13:35, Emil Renner Berthing <> wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2020 at 13:23, Björn Töpel <> wrote:
> > Indeed. And nice work! Can you respin the patch with the 32b fix
> > above, and also without the RFC tag?
> Yes, of course. If you don't mind I'll wait a bit and let this collect
> a bit more comments.


> > Curious; Why is [branch ? 1 : 0] needed when coding the boolean into
> > the key pointer (arm64 is just [branch]). Different encoding of
> > booleans (branch in this case)?
> No, that was just me being unsure exactly how bool works when used as
> an index. After reading up on it it seems the original code is right,
> you can actually trust that _Bool is either 0 or 1. I'll fix it in the
> next version. Thanks!

Cool! Thanks for clearing that up for me!


Powered by blists - more mailing lists