PING [Patch][Middle-end]Add -fzero-call-used-regs=[skip|used-gpr|all-gpr|used|all]

Tue Aug 25 14:05:43 GMT 2020

> On Aug 25, 2020, at 1:41 AM, Uros Bizjak <> wrote:
>>>>> (The other side of the coin is how much this helps prevent exploitation;
>>>>> numbers on that would be good to see, too.)
>>>> This can be well showed from the paper:
>>>> "Clean the Scratch Registers: A Way to Mitigate Return-Oriented Programming Attacks"
>>>>;!!GqivPVa7Brio!JbdLvo54xB3ORTeZqpy_PwZsL9drNLaKjbg14bTKMOwxt8LWnjZ8gJWlqtlrFKPh$ <;!!GqivPVa7Brio!JbdLvo54xB3ORTeZqpy_PwZsL9drNLaKjbg14bTKMOwxt8LWnjZ8gJWlqtlrFKPh$ >
>>>> Please take a look at this paper.
>>> As I told you before, that isn't open information, I cannot reply to
>>> any of that.
>> A little confused here, what’s you mean by “open information”? Is the information in a published paper not open information?
> No, because it is behind a paywall.

Still don’t understand here:  this paper has been published in the proceeding of “ 2018 IEEE 29th International Conference on Application-specific Systems, Architectures and Processors (ASAP)”.
If you want to read the complete version online, you need to pay for it.

However, it’s still a published paper, and the information inside it should be “open information”. 

So, what’s the definition of “open information” you have?

I downloaded a PDF copy of this paper through my company’s paid account.  But I am not sure whether it’s legal for me to attach it to this mailing list?


> Uros.

More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list