linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] compiler_attributes.h: add __attribute__((format

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: <72ac8661-312c-8df9-358a-22ddb0a81f54@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
Date:   Fri, 2 Nov 2018 11:43:06 +0100
From:   Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
To:     Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] compiler_attributes.h: add
 __attribute__((format_arg)) shorthand

On 2018-11-02 11:36, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> Hi Rasmus,
> 
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 2:06 PM Miguel Ojeda
> <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> I did quick check and gcc >= 4.1, clang >= 3.0, icc >= 13 compilers
>> seem to support it (or at least recognize it, even if they just ignore
>> it), so we do not need to make it optional, no? Did I miss some case?
> 
> compiler-attributes landed -- do you want to do the v2 of this (i.e.
> #defining it unconditionally) or you prefer I simply fix up the patch?

I'll wait a few more days for comments on fmtcheck(), and allow you to
do the 'optional'/'required' clarification in the meantime. I hope to
get fmtcheck() picked up for -next around -rc3 or so.

Rasmus