From: Jason Cooper Subject: Re: memset() in crypto code? Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 14:23:45 -0400 Message-ID: <20141006182345.GC14468@titan.lakedaemon.net> References: <20141006174403.GB14468@titan.lakedaemon.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org To: Sandy Harris Return-path: Received: from mho-03-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.66]:16200 "EHLO mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753036AbaJFSXr (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Oct 2014 14:23:47 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 01:59:06PM -0400, Sandy Harris wrote: > On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Jason Cooper wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 04, 2014 at 11:09:40PM -0400, Sandy Harris wrote: > >> There was recently a patch to the random driver to replace memset() > >> because, according to the submitter, gcc sometimes optimises memset() > >> away which might leave data unnecessarily exposed. The solution > >> suggested was a function called memzero_explicit(). There was a fair > >> bit of discussion and the patch was accepted. > > > > Do you have a pointer? > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/25/497 Ok, that was the same thread I found. I was looking for the 'fair bit of discussion' part. ;-) thx, Jason.