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:   Mon, 22 Feb 2021 08:03:31 -0800
From:   Guenter Roeck <>
To:     Masahiro Yamada <>
Cc:     Heiko Carstens <>,
        Kees Cook <>,,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,
        Arnd Bergmann <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gcc-plugins: Disable GCC_PLUGIN_CYC_COMPLEXITY for s390

On 2/22/21 7:45 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 12:18 AM Guenter Roeck <> wrote:
>> On 2/22/21 4:05 AM, Heiko Carstens wrote:
>>> On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 02:56:50PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>>> Commit 334ef6ed06fa ("init/Kconfig: make COMPILE_TEST depend on !S390") disabled
>>>> COMPILE_TEST for s390. At the same time, "make allmodconfig/allyesconfig" for
>>>> s390 is still supported. However, it generates thousands of compiler
>>>> messages such as the following, making it highly impractical to run.
>>>> Cyclomatic Complexity 1 scripts/mod/devicetable-offsets.c:main
>>>> Cyclomatic Complexity 1 scripts/mod/devicetable-offsets.c:_GLOBAL__sub_I_00100_0_main
>>>> Since GCC_PLUGIN_CYC_COMPLEXITY is primarily used for testing, disable it
>>>> when building s390 images.
>>>> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <>
>>>> Cc: Heiko Carstens <>
>>>> Fixes: 334ef6ed06fa ("init/Kconfig: make COMPILE_TEST depend on !S390")
>>>> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <>
>>>> ---
>>>>  scripts/gcc-plugins/Kconfig | 2 +-
>>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>> diff --git a/scripts/gcc-plugins/Kconfig b/scripts/gcc-plugins/Kconfig
>>>> index ab9eb4cbe33a..5e9bb500f443 100644
>>>> --- a/scripts/gcc-plugins/Kconfig
>>>> +++ b/scripts/gcc-plugins/Kconfig
>>>> @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ if GCC_PLUGINS
>>>>      bool "Compute the cyclomatic complexity of a function" if EXPERT
>>>> -    depends on !COMPILE_TEST        # too noisy
>>>> +    depends on !COMPILE_TEST && !S390       # too noisy
>>> I don't see a reason to disable this in general for s390. COMPILE_TEST
>>> was only disabled for s390 because a lot of irrelevant configs didn't
>>> compile and it would cause a lot of unnecessary work to fix that.
>>> However the !COMPILE_TEST dependency here looks more like it was
>>> misused in lack of a possibility to detect if the config was generated
>>> with allyesconfig/allmodconfig. Maybe that could be added somehow to
>>> Kconfig?
>> That is what COMPILE_TEST used to be for. Not setting it for s390 doesn't
>> just cause this config to be disabled. Lots of other compile tests
>> for s390 are now disabled as well, and code which should be disabled
>> is now enabled. Looking at it, I'd be a bit surprised if allmodconfig/
>> allyesconfig with COMPILE_TEST=y still builds for s390.
>> I agree that COMPILE_TEST it is being misused. However, I think what
>> you'd be looking for is something like COMPILE_TEST_RANDCONFIG.
>> FWIW, in my opinion, randconfig should not enable COMPILE_TEST
>> to start with. But that is a different discussion.
>> Anyway, I can disable GCC_PLUGIN_CYC_COMPLEXITY manually in my own
>> build tests, so this isn't that much of a problem for me, so feel
>> free to drop this patch.
>> Guenter
> Maybe, we can add something like CONFIG_SUPPRESS_NOISY_TESTS,
> which is set to y by all{yes,mod}config.
> This is self-documenting, so we do not need the '# too noisy' comment.
>        bool "suppress noisy test"
>         bool "Compute the cyclomatic complexity of a function" if EXPERT
>         depends on !SUPPRESS_NOISY_TESTS

Good idea. Downside would be that it won't solve the real problem
for s390 (which is lack of allmodconfig/allyesconfig compile test
coverage because COMPILE_TEST isn't set anymore), but that is a
different problem anyway, and my original patch doesn't solve
that either.

On the other side, if that flag would be set explicitly by
all{yes,mod}config, it would really beg for being misused. We
might then as well add a new flag that is explicitly associated
with all{yes,mod}config, but not with randconfig.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists