[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 18:11:45 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...omium.org>
Cc: Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 02/27] x86: Use symbol name in jump table for PIE
support
On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 09:04:45AM -0800, Thomas Garnier wrote:
> I assume that's an optimisation done by gcc later.
So why is that change even needed? Where does it break?
> The P modifier in the documentation does state that it is used to
> generate PIC code.
The documentation says:
"If used for a function, print the PLT suffix and generate PIC code. For
example, emit foo@PLT instead of ’foo’ for the function foo()."
when you use %P for a function. Which is not how it is used here.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
