linux-kernel - Re: [tip: x86/asm] x86/asm: Make ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT conditional on frame pointers

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: <CAHk-=wjRsMfndBGLZzkq7DOU7JOVZLsUaXnfjFvOcEw_Kd6h5g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2025 07:51:19 -1000
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org, 
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>, "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>, 
	Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [tip: x86/asm] x86/asm: Make ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT conditional on
 frame pointers

On Mon, 3 Mar 2025 at 22:33, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> So Josh forgot to Cc: lkml in this 5-patch series:

Honestly, this all seems to be complete garbage.

Yes, so Josh found a problem with the thing that has worked for years.

Then Josh did it another way AND THAT HAD EVEN MORE PROBLEMS.

So now it's trying to fix up all of *those* problems instead, making
the code uglier and more fragile.

And I'm not at all convinced that the new model works at all. It's a
random "this happens to work around it on the compiler versions I have
tested", rather than some obvious fix.

Put another way: the old code has years of testing and is
significantly simpler. The new code is new and untested and more
complicated and has already caused known new problems, never mind any
unknown ones.

It really doesn't sound like a good trade-off to me.

                   Linus