linux-kernel - Re: Linux 4.9.180 build fails with gcc 9 and 'cleanup_module' specifies less restrictive attribute than its target …

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]

Date:   Fri, 2 Aug 2019 12:39:38 +0200
From:   Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To:     Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:     Rolf Eike Beer <eb@...ix.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 4.9.180 build fails with gcc 9 and 'cleanup_module' specifies less restrictive attribute than its target …

On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 12:33 PM Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 12:19:33PM +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 10:17 AM Rolf Eike Beer <eb@...ix.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Am Samstag, 8. Juni 2019, 14:00:34 CEST schrieb Miguel Ojeda:
> > > > On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 8:59 PM Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> wrote:
> > > > > "manually fixing it up" means "hacked it to pieces" to me, I have no
> > > > > idea what the end result really was :)
> > > > >
> > > > > If someone wants to send me some patches I can actually apply, that
> > > > > would be best...
> > > >
> > > > I will give it a go whenever I get some free time :)
> > >
> > > I fear this has never happened, did it?
> >
> > No. Between summer, holidays and a conference I didn't get to do it.
> >
> > Done the minimal approach here:
> >
> >   https://github.com/ojeda/linux/commits/compiler-attributes-backport
> >
> > Tested building a handful of drivers with gcc 4.6.4, 8.3.0 and 9.1.1.
> >
> > Greg, I could backport the entire compiler_attributes.h, but given
> > this is stable, we are supposed to minimize changes, right?
> >
> > I tried to imitate what you do in other stable patches, please check
> > the Cc:, Link: lines and the "commit ... upstream" just in case.
>
> If only those 2 patches are all that is needed, nice!  I'll gladly take
> them, can you send them to me (and cc: the stable list) in email so I
> can queue them up for the next round of releases after this one?

Done! Please double check, since I am not used to send to stable.

Cheers,
Miguel