| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:52:09 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, ast@...com, daniel@...earbox.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/cpufeature: guard asm_volatile_goto usage with
NO_BPF_WORKAROUND
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 11:06:03AM -0700, Yonghong Song wrote:
> On 4/20/18 1:19 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Hurm, so adding __BPF__ for BPF compiles isn't an option? It seems to me
> > having a CPP flag to identify BPF compile context might be useful in
> > general.
>
> With "clang -target bpf", we already have __BPF__ defined.
> For tracing, esp. ptrace.h is included, "clang -target <native_arch>" where
> "-target <native_arch>" can be omitted, is typically used.
> The reason is the native architecture header files typically
> include a lot of various asm related stuff where "-target bpf" cannot
> really handle. We relay on native clang to flush out all these
> asm constructs and only bpf program needed stuff survives
> reach to backend compiler.
So because 'clang -target bpf' is 'broken', you do a work-around using
'clang -target <native_arch>'. But because that doesn't set __BPF__ you
want to add NO_BPF_WORKAROUND to the kernel instead of adding __BPF__ to
your build rules to better mimick -target bpf, which you should be
using.
How is that sane? Why not use 'clang -target <native_arch> -D__BPF__'
Powered by blists - more mailing lists