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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <202209290240.A2C342CF30@keescook> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 02:41:06 -0700 From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz> Cc: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@...il.com>, Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] compiler_types.h: Test for __alloc_size__ again On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 11:14:47AM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > On 9/29/22 10:16, Kees Cook wrote: > > While the "alloc_size" attribute is available on all GCC versions, I > > forgot that it gets disabled explicitly by the kernel in GCC < 9.1 due > > to misbehaviors. Add a note to the compiler_attributes.h entry for it, > > and restore the #ifdef in compiler_types.h. > > > > Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz> > > Cc: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org> > > Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com> > > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> > > Cc: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com> > > Cc: Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com> > > Cc: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com> > > Reported-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAMuHMdXK+UN1YVZm9DenuXAM8hZRUZJwp=SXsueP7sWiVU3a9A@mail.gmail.com > > Fixes: 63caa04ec60583b1 ("slab: Remove __malloc attribute from realloc functions") > > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> > > Thanks, I decided to late squash it so we don't needlessly cause issues for > people doing bisections with gcc-8 later. Sounds good to me; thanks! -- Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists