This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH 0/5] x86: CVE-2017-5715, aka Spectre


On Sun, 2018-01-14 at 21:52 +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> 
> Well, you did say that these are strange times ;)
> 
> From the user perspective, it would be more convenient to use the
> thunk names that are the same for 32bit and 64bit targets. If we
> ignore this fact, the difference is only a couple of lines in the
> compiler source which we also can live with. But please discuss my
> proposal also in the kernel community, and weight the benefits and
> drawbacks of each approach before the final decision.
> 
> Please pass the final decision to gcc community, and we'll implement
> it.

I think you watched this happen, but just to be explicitly clear:

We weighed the benefits and tested this, and we concluded that we don't
want it. Let's stick with e.g. __x86_indirect_thunk_rax please.

Thank you for being flexible.

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]