linux-ext4 - RE: Aarch64 EXT4FS inode checksum failures - seems to be weak memory ordering issues

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 12 Jan 2021 13:46:16 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Florian Weimer' <fweimer@...hat.com>,
        Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>
CC:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
        Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "linux-toolchains@...r.kernel.org" <linux-toolchains@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
        Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: RE: Aarch64 EXT4FS inode checksum failures - seems to be weak memory
 ordering issues

From: Florian Weimer
> Sent: 12 January 2021 13:32
> 
> * Lukas Wunner:
> 
> > On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 12:02:53PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >> I appreciate Arnd pointing out "--std=gnu11", though. What are the
> >> actual relevant language improvements?
> >>
> >> Variable declarations in for-loops is the only one I can think of. I
> >> think that would clean up some code (and some macros), but might not
> >> be compelling on its own.
> >
> > Anonymous structs/unions.  I used to have a use case for that in
> > struct efi_dev_path in include/linux/efi.h, but Ard Biesheuvel
> > refactored it in a gnu89-compatible way for v5.7 with db8952e7094f.
> 
> Aren't those a GNU extension supported since GCC 3.0?

They are certainly pretty old.
The 15 year old gcc we use for release builds (so binaries work
on old distributions) supports them.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)