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]
Message-ID: <20220331095658.GD23422@lst.de>
Date:   Thu, 31 Mar 2022 11:56:58 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>
Cc:     palmer@...belt.com, paul.walmsley@...ive.com,
        aou@...s.berkeley.edu, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, wefu@...hat.com,
        liush@...winnertech.com, guoren@...nel.org, atishp@...shpatra.org,
        anup@...infault.org, drew@...gleboard.org, hch@....de,
        arnd@...db.de, wens@...e.org, maxime@...no.tech,
        gfavor@...tanamicro.com, andrea.mondelli@...wei.com,
        behrensj@....edu, xinhaoqu@...wei.com, mick@....forth.gr,
        allen.baum@...erantotech.com, jscheid@...tanamicro.com,
        rtrauben@...il.com, samuel@...lland.org, cmuellner@...ux.com,
        philipp.tomsich@...ll.eu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 07/14] riscv: prevent compressed instructions in
 alternatives

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 01:07:03AM +0100, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> Instructions are opportunistically compressed by the RISC-V assembler
> when possible, but in alternatives-blocks both the old and new content
> need to be the same size, so having the toolchain do somewhat random
> optimizations will cause strange side-effects like
> "attempt to move .org backwards" compile-time errors.
> 
> Already a simple "and" used in alternatives assembly will cause these
> mismatched code sizes.
> 
> So prevent compressed instructions to be generated in alternatives-
> code and use option-push and -pop to only limit this to the relevant
> code blocks

Yes, that makes sense:

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ