linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ubsan: mark ubsan_type_mismatch

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: <CAK8P3a1ZgSYMuD0Xy_fxTqzPhg=U6rqG2Lcfc+3Bni=ZijiE3A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Jun 2019 17:06:39 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "# 3.4.x" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ubsan: mark ubsan_type_mismatch_common inline

On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 3:59 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 04:27:45PM +0300, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
> > On 6/18/19 3:56 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:02 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:

> > I guess this:
> > ccflags-y += $(DISABLE_STACKLEAK_PLUGIN)
>
> Or more specifically this, I guess:
>
> CFLAGS_ubsan.o := $(call cc-option, -fno-conserve-stack -fno-stack-protector) $(DISABLE_STACKLEAK_PLUGIN)
>
> we'd not want to exclude all of lib/ from stackleak I figure.
>
> Of these two options, I think I prefer the latter, because a smaller
> whitelist is a better whitelist and since we already disable
> stack protector, it is only consistent to also disable stack leak.

Ok, sounds good to me. Can you send that upstream then, or should
I write it up as a proper patch?

       Arnd