linux-hardening - Re: [PATCH RFC] gcc-plugins: Handle GCC version mismatch for OOT modules

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:   Wed, 27 Jan 2021 12:38:56 -0600
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Justin Forbes <jforbes@...hat.com>,
        Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] gcc-plugins: Handle GCC version mismatch for OOT
 modules

On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 06:02:15PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Please don't add all this garbage.  We only add infrastructure to the
> kernel for what the kernel itself needs, not for weird out of tree
> infrastructure.

This isn't new, the kernel already has the infrastructure for building
out-of-tree modules.  It's widely used.  Are you suggesting we remove
it?  Good luck with that...

Either it should be supported, or not.  Make the case either way.  But I
can't understand why people are advocating to leave it half-broken.

-- 
Josh