From: Daniel Borkmann Subject: Re: [BUG/PATCH] kernel RNG and its secrets Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 16:46:04 +0200 Message-ID: <5527E22C.9080909@iogearbox.net> References: <20150318095345.GA12923@zoho.com> <1697288.aUGCRhyl06@tauon> <1428675960.3377.8.camel@stressinduktion.org> <2115964.QxtQ6rHSkc@tauon> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mancha , tytso@mit.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, dborkman@redhat.com To: Stephan Mueller , Hannes Frederic Sowa Return-path: Received: from www62.your-server.de ([213.133.104.62]:43939 "EHLO www62.your-server.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932755AbbDJOq1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Apr 2015 10:46:27 -0400 In-Reply-To: <2115964.QxtQ6rHSkc@tauon> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 04/10/2015 04:36 PM, Stephan Mueller wrote: > Am Freitag, 10. April 2015, 16:26:00 schrieb Hannes Frederic Sowa: ... >> I suspected a problem in how volatile with non-present output args could >> be different, but this seems not to be the case. >> >> I would contact llvm/clang mailing list and ask. Maybe there is a >> problem? It seems kind of strange to me... +1 > Do you really think this is a compiler issue? If clang/LLVM advertises "GCC compatibility", then this would certainly be a different behavior.