2013/10/2 Ilya Enkovich :
> 2013/10/1 Jakub Jelinek :
>> On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 04:15:53PM +0400, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>>> I'd like to restart discussion on this topic. I see two viable options
>>> in this thread for PLT entry for MPX.
>>>
>>> The first one is to use new relocation for calls requi
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 01:31:29PM +0400, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> Seems assembler may not always detect MPX relocation. For simple calls
> it may check for 'bnd' prefix, but for indirect call we need to
> generate MPX relocation for 'mov' instruction storing address of the
> called function. This in
On 10/06/2013 03:19 PM, Morwenn Ed wrote:
Ok, no problem then, here is the patch. And the changelog. I hope they
are ok, I have never properly submitted anything before.
Patch looks great to me, thanks. I'm applying it.
Thanks,
Paolo.
2013/10/7 Jakub Jelinek :
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 01:31:29PM +0400, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> Seems assembler may not always detect MPX relocation. For simple calls
>> it may check for 'bnd' prefix, but for indirect call we need to
>> generate MPX relocation for 'mov' instruction storing address of
> This has nothing to do with Oracle v. Google, but with GCC policy of not
> requiring a copyright assignment for small patches from the first-time
> contributors (which Paolo knows as a long-time GCC hacker).
I think it's a valid reminder that that policy needs to be interpreted
carefully and
