Re: [PATCH v2] add -fprolog-pad=N option to c-family

> On Oct 5, 2016, at 12:45 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: > >> On Sep 29, 2016, at 11:14 AM, Torsten Duwe wrote: >> >> In case anybody missed it, the Linux kernel side to make use >> of this has also been finished meanwhile. Of course it can not >> be

Re: [PATCH v2] add -fprolog-pad=N option to c-family

> On Sep 29, 2016, at 11:14 AM, Torsten Duwe wrote: > > In case anybody missed it, the Linux kernel side to make use > of this has also been finished meanwhile. Of course it can not > be accepted without compiler support; and this feature patch > is much more versatile than just

Re: [PATCH v2] add -fprolog-pad=N option to c-family

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 12:01:47PM +0200, Jose E. Marchesi wrote: > > In case anybody missed it, the Linux kernel side to make use > of this has also been finished meanwhile. Of course it can not > be accepted without compiler support; and this feature patch > is much more

Re: [PATCH v2] add -fprolog-pad=N option to c-family

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 12:01:47PM +0200, Jose E. Marchesi wrote: > > How is this supposed to be exploited atomically in RISC arches such as > sparc? In such architectures you usually need to patch several > instructions to load an absolute address into a register.

Re: [PATCH v2] add -fprolog-pad=N option to c-family

In case anybody missed it, the Linux kernel side to make use of this has also been finished meanwhile. Of course it can not be accepted without compiler support; and this feature patch is much more versatile than just Linux kernel live patching on a single architecture. How

[PATCH v2] add -fprolog-pad=N option to c-family

In case anybody missed it, the Linux kernel side to make use of this has also been finished meanwhile. Of course it can not be accepted without compiler support; and this feature patch is much more versatile than just Linux kernel live patching on a single architecture. Changes since the previous