* H. J. Lu via Gcc:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 10:24 AM David Woodhouse wrote:
>> Sure, there is work to do to enable CET. But Andy's point is that
>> we deliberately fixed up retpoline to be register-based
>> *specifically* for the purpose of being CET-compatible, so it's
>> somewhat daft for GCC
> On Apr 28, 2020, at 10:44 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 10:24 AM David Woodhouse wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 28 April 2020 17:14:49 BST, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 02:41:33PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
Its fine to focus on userspace first, but t
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 10:24 AM David Woodhouse wrote:
>
>
>
> On 28 April 2020 17:14:49 BST, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 02:41:33PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> >> Its fine to focus on userspace first, but the kernel is far more
> >simple.
> >>
> >> Looking at that present
On 28 April 2020 17:14:49 BST, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 02:41:33PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> Its fine to focus on userspace first, but the kernel is far more
>simple.
>>
>> Looking at that presentation, the only thing missing for kernel is
>the
>> notrack thunks, in
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 9:33 AM Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 28, 2020, at 9:14 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 02:41:33PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> >> Its fine to focus on userspace first, but the kernel is far more simple.
> >>
> >> Looking at that pre
> On Apr 28, 2020, at 9:14 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 02:41:33PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> Its fine to focus on userspace first, but the kernel is far more simple.
>>
>> Looking at that presentation, the only thing missing for kernel is the
>> notrack thunks,
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 02:41:33PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> Its fine to focus on userspace first, but the kernel is far more simple.
>
> Looking at that presentation, the only thing missing for kernel is the
> notrack thunks, in the unlikely case that such code would be tolerated
> (Frankly,
On 28/04/2020 16:09, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 8:06 AM Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 28.04.2020 17:00, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 6:41 AM Andrew Cooper
>>> wrote:
On 28/04/2020 14:00, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 5:43 AM Andrew Cooper
> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 8:06 AM Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> On 28.04.2020 17:00, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 6:41 AM Andrew Cooper
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 28/04/2020 14:00, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 5:43 AM Andrew Cooper
> >>> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I r
On 28.04.2020 17:00, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 6:41 AM Andrew Cooper
> wrote:
>>
>> On 28/04/2020 14:00, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 5:43 AM Andrew Cooper
>>> wrote:
Hello,
I raised https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93654 but it has
h
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 6:41 AM Andrew Cooper wrote:
>
> On 28/04/2020 14:00, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 5:43 AM Andrew Cooper
> > wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I raised https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93654 but it has
> >> had nothing but tumbleweeds in months, and i
On 28/04/2020 14:00, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 5:43 AM Andrew Cooper
> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I raised https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93654 but it has
>> had nothing but tumbleweeds in months, and it is continuing to cause
>> problems for Xen.
>>
>> During the Spectre
Hi!
The same testcase as has been used for powerpc64le-linux can be
used for aarch64-linux too:
struct X { };
struct Y { int : 0; };
struct Z { int : 0; Y y; };
struct U : public X { X q; };
struct A { float a, b, c, d; };
struct B : public X { float a, b, c, d; };
struct C : public Y { float a,
Hello,
I raised https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93654 but it has
had nothing but tumbleweeds in months, and it is continuing to cause
problems for Xen.
During the Spectre embargo period, it was specifically identified that
kernels would need to be able to compile one single binary, w
Hi,
Does the analysis framework available in GCC 10 is an instance of an
IFDS or an IDE framework? The Analyzer Internals [0] refers to the IFDS
paper [1], but I am not sure if this is only to provide a reference to
the definition of exploded supergraph.
Also, if I want to implement my own I
Please move this discussion to the gcc-help mailing list where it
belongs. I'll reply on that list instead.
On Tue, 28 Apr 2020 at 07:07, luo alvin wrote:
>
> Thank you very much for replying me. I also think it not bug,because I test
> this code in the lower version(lower than 8.3.1-3) of gcc,a
16 matches
Mail list logo
