From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk" <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
"Wysocki, Rafael J" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
"ebiederm@xmission.com" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
"Chatre, Reinette" <reinette.chatre@intel.com>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
"Brown, Len" <len.brown@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86: Separate out x86_regset for 32 and 64 bit
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2022 19:48:52 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202203151948.E5076F4BB@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fe7ce2ae1011b240e3a6ee8b0425ff3e2c675b6d.camel@intel.com>
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 09:53:13PM +0000, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-03-15 at 13:41 -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > Have you verified there's no binary difference in machine code
> > output?
>
> There actually was a different in the binaries. I investigated a bit,
> and it seemed at least part of it was due to the line numbers changing
> the WARN_ON()s. But otherwise, I assumed some compiler optimization
> must have been bumped.
Right, you can ignore all the debugging line number changes.
"diffoscope" should help see the difference by section. As long as the
actual object code isn't changing, you should be good.
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-16 2:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-15 20:17 [PATCH 0/3] Regset cleanups Rick Edgecombe
2022-03-15 20:17 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86: Separate out x86_regset for 32 and 64 bit Rick Edgecombe
2022-03-15 20:41 ` Kees Cook
2022-03-15 21:53 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2022-03-16 2:48 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2022-03-16 19:06 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2022-03-16 19:42 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2022-03-16 19:43 ` Kees Cook
2022-03-15 23:01 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-03-15 23:33 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2022-03-15 20:17 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86: Improve formatting of user_regset arrays Rick Edgecombe
2022-03-15 20:38 ` Kees Cook
2022-03-15 21:48 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2022-03-15 20:17 ` [PATCH 3/3] elf: Don't write past end of notes for regset gap Rick Edgecombe
2022-03-15 20:37 ` Kees Cook
2022-03-15 21:48 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2022-03-16 2:48 ` Kees Cook
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=202203151948.E5076F4BB@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).