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: <Y3Jj67TZ9tA2a6Pf@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Mon, 14 Nov 2022 16:51:07 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     "Jiri Slaby (SUSE)" <jirislaby@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
        Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        Martin Liska <mliska@...e.cz>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/46] static_call, lto: Mark static keys as __visible

On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 12:43:06PM +0100, Jiri Slaby (SUSE) wrote:
> From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
> 
> Symbols referenced from assembler (either directly or e.f. from
> DEFINE_STATIC_KEY()) need to be global and visible in gcc LTO because
> they could end up in a different object file than the assembler. This
> can lead to linker errors without this patch.
> 
> So mark static call functions as __visible, namely static keys here.

Why doesn't llvm-lto need this?

Also, why am I getting a random selection of the patchset?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ