linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] um: Avoid longjmp/setjmp symbol clashes with libpthread.a

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]

Message-ID: <f57b5906-30cc-0fdf-893c-39e4f5202d1b@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 1 Jun 2017 13:40:01 -0700
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Thomas Meyer <thomas@...3r.de>
Cc:     Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "open list:USER-MODE LINUX (UML)" 
        <user-mode-linux-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
        "open list:USER-MODE LINUX (UML)" 
        <user-mode-linux-user@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] um: Avoid longjmp/setjmp symbol clashes with
 libpthread.a

On 06/01/2017 01:17 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am 01.06.2017 um 22:15 schrieb Florian Fainelli:
>> On 06/01/2017 01:11 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>>> Florian,
>>>
>>> Am 01.06.2017 um 21:38 schrieb Florian Fainelli:
>>>>> Presumably because we are not using the same glibc version? The one I
>>>>> have installed on this machine is glibc-2.12, do you want me to attach a
>>>>> copy of it?
>>>>
>>>> Richard, what do we do with this?
>>>
>>> I'd like to see the issues that Thomas sees also get addressed.
>>
>> Sure, but that seems orthogonal? In the absence of an answer from Eli,
>> either you could take my patch or just send reverts of Eli's two
>> commits, whichever you prefer.
> 
> Or you and Thomas could investigate. :-)

Honestly, I don't know what do you want me to investigate, my host
machine is old (2.6.32) and does not support PTRACE_GETREGSET or
friends, nor does it have _xstate, so with that, we either don't use
those period, which would be a revert, or we just conditionally build
support for that (my patch) and everyone is happy.

I don't know what the issue Thomas is having (he is now CC'd) and I
still don't understand why you insist on conflating the symbol clash
while statically linking with support for newer x86 FPU stuff...
-- 
Florian