linux-kernel - Re: Look Ma, da kernel is b0rken

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:	Thu, 6 Dec 2012 07:57:21 +1100
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andreas Mohr <andi@...as.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Li Shaohua <shaohua.li@...el.com>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Look Ma, da kernel is b0rken

Hi Alan,

On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 15:47:49 +0000 Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
>
> And yes btw we should turn this option on in -next, and get these sort of
> things out of the tree for good. More importantly it'll mean anyone
> adding another one gets a whine on the spot.

While I appreciate your confidence, I don't notice quite a few new
warnings (because there are so many of them already :-().  Is there some
reason to not turn this on in our "normal" builds?  Does it produce many
false positives?  What compiler version is required?

I also currently don't carry patches that only ever appear in linux-next
(well, not intentionally anyway).  I assume it would require a patch to
the Makefile(s) to turn this on.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped