From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
To: "keescook@chromium.org" <keescook@chromium.org>
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 21:53:13 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fe7ce2ae1011b240e3a6ee8b0425ff3e2c675b6d.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202203151340.7447F75BDC@keescook>
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.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-15 21:53 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 [this message]
2022-03-16 2:48 ` Kees Cook
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=fe7ce2ae1011b240e3a6ee8b0425ff3e2c675b6d.camel@intel.com \
--to=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--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=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).