linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] bug: always show source-tree-relative paths in WARN()/BUG()

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: <CA+ASDXNGqYkBjMsjcRKAit+0cd0n7dwxKhezyYCXSh_HjucvQw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 11 Jul 2019 18:23:19 -0700
From:   Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
To:     Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] bug: always show source-tree-relative paths in WARN()/BUG()

On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 6:14 PM Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> wrote:
> BTW, did you see this?
>
> commit a73619a845d5625079cc1b3b820f44c899618388
> Author: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
> Date:   Fri Mar 30 13:15:26 2018 +0900
>
>     kbuild: use -fmacro-prefix-map to make __FILE__ a relative path

Oh, wow, no I did not. If my reading is correct, that's GCC only? I've
been using various combinations of newer (5.2) and older (4.14.y --
didn't have that patch) kernels, older GCC (doesn't have that feature
AFAICT), and newer Clang (doesn't appear to have that feature). So I'm
not totally sure if I ever actually tried a combo that *could* make
use of that. But I may give it another shot.

In the event that this is GCC-specific...I don't suppose I could
convince anybody to expend any effort (e.g., taking a patch like mine)
to solve it for the non-GCC world?

Thanks for the tip,
Brian