linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 8/10] bug.h: Make BUILD_BUG

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Fri, 28 Sep 2012 19:55:07 -0700
From:	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
To:	Daniel Santos <daniel.santos@...ox.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Christopher Li <sparse@...isli.org>,
	David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org>,
	linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org,
	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
	Pavel Pisa <pisa@....felk.cvut.cz>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/10] bug.h: Make BUILD_BUG_ON generate compile-time error

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 08:26:08PM -0500, Daniel Santos wrote:
> On 09/28/2012 07:32 PM, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 06:20:09PM -0500, Daniel Santos wrote:
> >> Negative sized arrays wont create a compile-time error in some cases
> >> starting with gcc 4.4 (e.g., inlined functions), but gcc 4.3 introduced
> >> the error function attribute that will.  This patch modifies
> >> BUILD_BUG_ON to behave like BUILD_BUG already does, using the error
> >> function attribute so that you don't have to build the entire kernel to
> >> discover that you have a problem, and then enjoy trying to track it down
> >> from a link-time error.
> >
> > Rather than doing both, and potentially producing two errors for the
> > same issue, how about using __compiletime_error only, and only using the
> > negative-sized array when __compiletime_error has no useful definition?
> >
> > For instance, in compiler.h, when defining __compiletime_error as an
> > empty macro in the fallback case, you could define a
> > __compiletime_error_fallback() macro that declares a negative-sized
> > array; you could then define __compiletime_error_fallback() as an empty
> > macro when it doesn't exist.
> It may also make sense to define
> #define BUILD_BUG() BUILD_BUG_ON(1)
> 
> I haven't examined this really closely yet and my eyes are getting a
> little bleary :)
> 
> 
> Really, I would have liked to be able to set the error message as
> well, but we would have to have the macro generate a unique function
> name for each time its expanded to make that work.  Example:
> 
> #define BUILD_BUG_ON(cond) BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG(cond, #cond)
> #define BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG(cond, msg)                                \
>     do {                                                           \
>         extern void __build_bug_on_failed ## something_unique(void)\
>             __compiletime_error("BUILD_BUG_ON failed: " msg);      \
>         __compiletime_error_fallback(cond);                        \
>         if (cond)                                                  \
>             __build_bug_on_failed();                               \
>     } while(0)
> 
> I just don't know any tricks to generate unique pre-processor
> value automatically.

Assuming you don't call BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG more than once per line:

/tmp$ cat test.c
#define BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG_INTERNAL2(cond, msg, line) \
    do { \
        extern void __build_bug_on_failed_ ## line (void) __attribute__((error(msg))); \
        if (cond) \
            __build_bug_on_failed_ ## line(); \
    } while (0)

#define BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG_INTERNAL(cond, msg, line) BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG_INTERNAL2(cond, msg, line)
#define BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG(cond, msg) BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG_INTERNAL(cond, msg, __LINE__)

void f(void)
{
    BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG(0, "test 1");
    BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG(1, "test 2");
    BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG(0, "test 3");
    BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG(1, "test 4");
}
/tmp$ gcc -c test.c
test.c: In function ‘f’:
test.c:14:119: error: call to ‘__build_bug_on_failed_14’ declared with attribute error: test 2
test.c:16:119: error: call to ‘__build_bug_on_failed_16’ declared with attribute error: test 4

- Josh Triplett
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/