linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] EFI fixes

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:   Wed, 8 Jul 2020 11:00:19 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] EFI fixes

On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 9:21 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> >
> > It's perhaps yet another reason to just skip gcc-4.8 too, since
> > apparently 4.9 works.
> >
> > gcc-4.9 really has a lot of advantages. It's where (I think) gcc
> > basically supports all C11 things, including _Generic() but also
> > __auto_type.
>
> +1
>
> Anybody for nay, or should we just do this?

I'll just do it. Let's see if anybody screams with a good reason. I
hate the whole "support old compilers", it ends up not only making for
complex code, it tends to cause these unnecessary kinds of "guys, we
tested this really well, but that crazy compiler had a very particular
odd issue, and it wasn't in any test box.

                Linus