linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/7] Compiler Attributes: remove unused attributes

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: <CAKwvOd=kePHrDA7NJKyu8aiXVt7iRsxXNRe3tkG3rp-c0xpO5A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 31 Aug 2018 11:43:28 -0700
From:   Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
To:     joe@...ches.com
Cc:     Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, efriedma@...eaurora.org,
        sparse@...isli.org, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        asmadeus@...ewreck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] Compiler Attributes: remove unused attributes

On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:28 AM Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2018-08-31 at 19:05 +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> > __optimize and __deprecate_for_modules are unused in
> > the whole kernel tree. Simply drop them.
>
> Nice series, thanks Miguel.
>
> It'd be good to have a cover letter for the series.
>
> And I believe there should be the equivalent of:
>
> #if GCC_VERSION < 40600
> # error Sorry, your compiler is too old - please upgrade it.
> #endif
>
> for compiler-intel.h and compiler-clang.h so that
> each supported compiler minimum version is checked.
>
> Is it clang > 13 and icc > 3 ?

Eh, I'm not sure I want to commit yet to a specific minimal version of
Clang.  Right now, we're fixing things so depending on arch's and
configs, the answer might be Top of Tree clang builds.  For Pixel, we
shipped with Clang-4, but pretty quickly we needed Clang-5.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/22/943

I had sent patches previously for detecting clang version from the C
preprocessor, maybe I should dust those off, then commit to clang 5.

I don't think minimal supported versions are required for these clean
ups, and would not block these patches from landing on that.

Also, haven't found anyone using ICC yet to comment on minimal version
requirements.
-- 
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers