linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Mar 18 (objtool)

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:   Thu, 26 Mar 2020 11:31:10 -0500
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Mar 18 (objtool)

On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 10:57:02PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > In the meantime I can still change objtool to ignore unreachable UD2s if
> > there aren't any better ideas.
> 
> It'll still need the objtool change for CONFIG_UBSAN_TRAP, though based on
> the clang bug discussion, I'll probably _also_ be adding CONFIG_UBSAN_WARN
> which won't have an unreachable (and won't bloat the kernel). Testing
> still under way... it is possible that CONFIG_UBSAN_TRAP will go away
> in the future, though. If that happens, should I also remove the change
> at that time?

I'll go ahead and make the patch and post it soon.  It should be pretty
trivial.  We can always revert it if CONFIG_UBSAN_TRAP goes away.

-- 
Josh