[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180331053434.akno723avvcri654@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2018 07:34:34 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Martin Uecker <Martin.Uecker@....uni-goettingen.de>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
Ian Abbott <abbotti@....co.uk>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] kernel.h: Retain constant expression output for
max()/min()
* Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 10:47 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > * Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> >
> >> In the effort to remove all VLAs from the kernel[1], it is desirable to
> >> build with -Wvla. However, this warning is overly pessimistic, in that
> >> it is only happy with stack array sizes that are declared as constant
> >> expressions, and not constant values. One case of this is the evaluation
> >> of the max() macro which, due to its construction, ends up converting
> >> constant expression arguments into a constant value result.
> >>
> >> All attempts to rewrite this macro with __builtin_constant_p() failed with
> >> older compilers (e.g. gcc 4.4)[2]. However, Martin Uecker constructed[3] a
> >> mind-shattering solution that works everywhere. Cthulhu fhtagn!
> >>
> >> This patch updates the min()/max() macros to evaluate to a constant
> >> expression when called on constant expression arguments. This removes
> >> several false-positive stack VLA warnings from an x86 allmodconfig
> >> build when -Wvla is added:
> >
> > Cool!
> >
> > Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
> >
> > How many warnings are left in an allmodconfig build?
>
> For -Wvla? Out of the original 112 files with VLAs, 42 haven't had a
> patch applied yet. Doing a linux-next allmodconfig build with the
> max() patch and my latest ecc patch, we've gone from 316 warning
> instances to 205. More than half of those are in
> include/crypto/skcipher.h and include/crypto/hash.h.
Great - once the number of warnings is zero, is the plan to enable the warning
unconditionally?
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists