[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160113101801.GA9539@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 11:18:01 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Pedro Alves <palves@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com>,
Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@...rovitsch.priv.at>,
Chris J Arges <chris.j.arges@...onical.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
Alok Kataria <akataria@...are.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Mathias Krause <minipli@...linux.so>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 00/25] Compile-time stack metadata validation
* Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 06:39:14AM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > This is v15 of the compile-time stack metadata validation patch set,
> > along with proposed fixes for many of the warnings it found. It's based
> > on the tip/master branch.
>
> Ok,
>
> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
>
> With it applied, my .config gives ~1000 stacktool warnings.
That's way too high!
We should really strive for zero warnings on common configs - otherwise we'll just
drown in the noise of warnings, and people won't notice (and won't care about) new
warnings.
With a zero warnings baseline on a reasonable default kernel config people can
test for new warnings.
> One of the issues that bugs me recently is adding tool-specific markers
> to unrelated code and new tools tend to love doing that. But this makes
> unrelated code ugly and people touching it shouldn't have to know about
> those tools.
>
> I guess you could improve the analysis of vmlinux as stacktool is
> running post-compile and thus put the onus on the tool to do the right
> thing and not on the code.
>
> But that's for the TODO.
So if we still have 1,000 warnings, then it's more than a TODO - it's more like a
MUSTFIX! :-)
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists