On 12/27/13 10:46 AM, David Miller wrote:
From: Dan Anderson <dan.ander...@oracle.com> Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2013 09:37:10 -0800I really don't understand the desire to preserve dead, never-used code in OpenSSL. The SPARC random instruction doesn't exist, OpenSSL never used it and never can use it, but you don't want to remove the check for it. It seems silly to me.Ok, how about we replace the random instruction detection with an explicit forced illegal instruction test early in the sparc init code that makes sure the SIGILL facility is working properly?
Hi Dave,That's fine--it's not all that we want (a Solaris-specific use of getisax()), but a half-a-loaf is better than none. At least a never-conceived SPARC instruction would not be checked for in OpenSSL.
A separate bug on the debugger will be filed separately. BTW, we appreciate your SPARC contributions to OpenSSL in the past. Dan
That is, we'll unconditionally and always generate a SIGILL every time openssl is used. I'm perfectly fine with that, but you guys will be in the same position you are now, having to cope with the debugger issue. ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
-- uosบǝpuɐ uɐp dan.ander...@oracle.com, Oracle Solaris, San Diego, +1 858-526-9418
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
