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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 10:56:27 +0300 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net Subject: Re: [PHC] Specification of a modular crypt format (2) On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 07:20:53AM +0100, Samuel Neves wrote: > On 10/06/2015 05:19 AM, Peter Gutmann wrote: > > Maybe I should just tell everyone to use icc, which doesn't seem to have > > these problems (and generally produces better code than gcc to boot). > > I'm pretty sure any aggressive enough compiler will do these. Cf. http://goo.gl/tYzkvD Curiously, for all compilers currently available on gcc.godbolt.org except for icc, adding -fwrapv results in code getting generated for the assert(). (But we should not use this as an excuse for writing broken checks like this.) icc appears to silently ignore -fwrapv (for gcc "compatibility" maybe). Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists