[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jLT494F_jM3Q6GFaestU0cg-=bx_+g-1v2myTsCmnVH5A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 08:28:51 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...el.com>, Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>,
Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@...el.com>, Eric Northup <digitaleric@...gle.com>,
Dan Rosenberg <drosenberg@...curity.com>, Julien Tinnes <jln@...gle.com>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] x86: kaslr: move CPU flags out of cpucheck
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 3:00 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 04/25/2013 02:54 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>> Since has_eflag() and has_fpu() are 32-bit only, short-circuit the
>> routines on 64-bit when they are built without -m32. This also refactors
>> the calls to cpuid to make them PIC-safe on 32-bit.
>
> These functions can trivially be made 32- and 64-bit agnostic by
> changing "u32" to "unsigned long" and drop the -l suffixes in the
> assembly code.
Ah, good call. I found what was stopping me earlier. The u32 argument
needed to be switched to unsigned long too. Duh. :)
Thanks!
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Chrome OS Security
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.
