linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Raise the minimum required gcc version to 4.6

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: <CAKwvOdnNRfK+HiyjSv+OaK-wo5ExcFBc=nK-PMSEXiD0bu_11g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 23 Aug 2018 15:00:15 -0700
From:   Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     joe@...ches.com, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        dave.hansen@...el.com, efault@....de,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Raise the minimum required gcc version to 4.6

On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 2:52 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> Thanks for your patch!
>
> I'm willing to upgrade. But there's one thing that's holding me back.
>
> Does gcc 8.x gives again the same warnings as my venerable old gcc 4.1.2,
> that no one else seems to see? Or will the real bugs I detect this way stay
> unfixed? Polyculture is a good thing, also in compilers.

Hi Geert,
Just for folks who may be missing context on this thread, like myself,
can you provide links to more information?  If I understand your
question correctly, it seems that warnings were removed from gcc since
4.1.2?  And that bugs have been caught by testing with gcc 4.1.2 (can
you provide commit sha's)?  I assume you've already discussed such an
issue with the gcc maintainers (can you provide links to those
discussions)?  Sorry, if this has already been discussed already on
LKML, but even a post that had all this information would be immensely
helpful in understanding your plight.

-- 
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers