Hello, I asked upstream regarding this patch, and we went over the code, there is no need for storing ebx as it is not used. In the past, it was used and the patch was correct, but then it was dragged into newer versions without any reason. Thanks!
Can you give a (public) reference to that discussion or replicate it here?
No. Unfortunately, there is no mailing list for this project. --- From: Rafal Wojtczuk <rafal@invisiblethingslab.com> Date: 2010/3/1 Subject: Re: [PATCHES] libnids To: Alon Bar-Lev <alon.barlev@gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 09:47:38PM +0200, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > 2010/3/1 Rafal Wojtczuk <rafal@invisiblethingslab.com>: > > On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 04:35:23PM +0200, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > >> libnids-007-chksum.c-ebx.patch - this one I got from Gentoo, are you > >> sure the gcc coded (=stuff) do not touch ebx? > > No harm to apply; although I would be surprised if =stuff touched ABI > > reserved register. For my education, could you point me to some evidence it > > is really needed ? Why not to save %esi as well, then ? > > I guess not. I tried to disassem this and no ebx is used. > The Gentoo people must had some reason... Oh... found it [1], code > must have been changed since. > > [1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55906 Ancient libnids checksum code used ebx register in its asm code. Now it does not, therefore the problem is gone.
That will have to do, then. I removed the patch from the 1.24 ebuild and it will leave the tree when the two older ebuilds do. Thanks for reporting!
