On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 9:11 AM Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 09:04:45AM -0800, Thomas Garnier wrote:
> > I assume that's an optimisation done by gcc later.
>
> So why is that change even needed? Where does it break?
>
> > The P modifier in the documentation does state that it
On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 09:04:45AM -0800, Thomas Garnier wrote:
> I assume that's an optimisation done by gcc later.
So why is that change even needed? Where does it break?
> The P modifier in the documentation does state that it is used to
> generate PIC code.
The documentation says:
"If used
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 4:17 AM Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 11:24:09AM -0800, Thomas Garnier wrote:
> > Replace the %c constraint with %P. The %c is incompatible with PIE
> > because it implies an immediate value whereas %P reference a symbol.
>
> How so?
>
> AFAIK, %c
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 11:24:09AM -0800, Thomas Garnier wrote:
> Replace the %c constraint with %P. The %c is incompatible with PIE
> because it implies an immediate value whereas %P reference a symbol.
How so?
AFAIK, %c requires a constant operand and if %P is used to print a
constant, it
4 matches
Mail list logo