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: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 17:39:54 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/17] kbuild: Disable -Waddress-of-packed-member for gcc 9 On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 02:58:51PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:00 PM Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote: > > > > From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com> > > > > This warning is very noisy in a default build with gcc 9. > > Move it into W=2 only. > > > > Cc: arnd@...db.de > > Cc: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> > > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com> > > I think W=2 is too aggressive. On many architectures, this finds > real bugs and the false positives tend to be trivial to fix > (by removing the bogus __packed annotation), which improves > the generated code in the process. > > Moving it to W=1 for the moment is probably fine, but ideally > I think we should fix the kernel to behave according to the > C standard. Lol... we're actively moving away from the C standard on many places. Why does the silly compiler think it is a problem to take the address of a member of a packed structure? That sounds like something that's perfectly fine and useful.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists