linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Driver core patches for 5.1-rc1

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: <CAK8P3a3cQ1MCyWvh6Ei5_zKhcDrkV7P5ZZdUAn23ooAqNnipww@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 7 Mar 2019 08:35:29 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andy Gross <andy.gross@...aro.org>,
        David Brown <david.brown@...aro.org>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
        Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Driver core patches for 5.1-rc1

On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 12:48 AM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 2:33 AM Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> I wonder why this wasn't seen in linux-next? Yes, the connection is
> odd, and maybe it's very compiler version dependent, but I do hope
> people react to new warnings. The kernel is entirely warning-free for
> me for an x86-64 allmodconfig build, and I want to keep it that way.

I saw it in linux-next and sent a patch the other day, similar to yours,
but with a less verbose changelog:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10838499/

Overall, I had not done regular randconfig testing since the start of
the year, and found 62 regressions that had crept in during that
period. There was no significant uptick in -Wmaybe-uninitialized
warnings, this is the only one I saw, so I'd classify this as random
change in behavior due to inlining differences rather than a systematic
issue.
(there was a noticeable change in other warnings, particularly a stack
size increase from the new structleak plugin changes, fix is coming).

     Arnd