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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 16:00:55 -0700 From: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com> To: daniel.santos@...ox.com Cc: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, sparse@...isli.org, linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] compiler.h: give up __compiletime_assert_fallback() On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 1:42 PM Daniel Santos <daniel.santos@...ox.com> wrote: > > Hello Nick, > > On 08/27/2018 03:09 PM, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > >>> Let's give up __compiletime_assert_fallback(). This commit does not > >>> change the current behavior since it just rips off the useless code. > >> Clang is not the only target audience of > >> __compiletime_assert_fallback(). Instead of ripping out something that > >> may benefit builds with gcc 4.2 and earlier, why not override its > > Note that with commit cafa0010cd51 ("Raise the minimum required gcc > > version to 4.6") that gcc < 4.6 is irrelevant. > > Ah, I guess I'm not keeping up, that's wonderful news! Considering that > I guess I would be OK with its removal, but I still think it would be > better if a similar mechanism to break the Clang build could be found. I'm consulting with our best language lawyers to see what combinations of _Static_assert and __builtin_constant_p would do the trick.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists