linux-hardening - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/7] overflow: add DEFINE

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:   Sat, 19 Aug 2023 12:06:09 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc:     Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
        kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
        Yujie Liu <yujie.liu@...el.com>,
        Philip Li <philip.li@...el.com>,
        rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
        oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev,
        Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
        intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org,
        Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>,
        linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/7] overflow: add DEFINE_FLEX() for on-stack
 allocs

On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 01:10:07PM +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 12:38 PM Przemek Kitszel
> <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com> wrote:
> >
> > Rust folks, could you please tell me if this is something I should fix,
> > or I just uncovered some existing bug in "unstable" thing?
> >
> > Perhaps it is worth to mention, diff of v3 vs v2 is:
> > move dummy implementation of __has_builtin() macro to the top of
> > compiler_types.h, just before `#ifndef ASSEMBLY`
> 
> Nothing you need to worry about, it is an issue with old `bindgen` and
> LLVM >= 16, fixed in commit 08ab786556ff ("rust: bindgen: upgrade to
> 0.65.1") which is in `rust-next` at the moment. Sorry about that, and
> thanks for pinging us!
> 
> LKP / Yujie / Philip: since we got a few reports on this, would it be
> possible to avoid LLVM >= 16 for Rust-enabled builds for any branch
> that does not include the new `bindgen` or at least 08ab786556ff? Or,
> if Greg is OK with that, I guess we could also backport the upgrade,
> but perhaps it is a bit too much for stable?

Commit is tiny enough for stable backports if it fixes a real issue that
everyone needs to address, so I have no objection to taking it for
stable releases once it hits Linus's tree.

thanks,

greg k-h