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
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 1 May 2020 14:27:43 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Remaining randconfig objtool warnings, linux-next-20200428

On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 07:28:58PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 04:05:07PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > lib/locking-selftest.o: warning: objtool: locking_selftest()+0x117f: PUSHF stack exhausted
> > lib/locking-selftest.o: warning: objtool: ww_tests()+0x1083: PUSHF stack exhausted
> 
> Peter,
> 
> These functions have a bunch of irqs_disabled() checks, which means a
> bunch of PUSHFs with no POPFs.
> 
> Am I reading it correctly that objtool assumes PUSHF is always paired
> with POPF?  irqs_disabled() doesn't do that.

Right, it sorta does. I wonder why this shows up with GCC-10 though, and
not before.

Anyway, the sneaky fix here would be something like this.

diff --git a/lib/locking-selftest.c b/lib/locking-selftest.c
index 14f44f59e733..510656c776d9 100644
--- a/lib/locking-selftest.c
+++ b/lib/locking-selftest.c
@@ -1138,7 +1138,7 @@ static void dotest(void (*testcase_fn)(void), int expected, int lockclass_mask)
 {
 	unsigned long saved_preempt_count = preempt_count();
 
-	WARN_ON(irqs_disabled());
+	lockdep_assert_irqs_enabled();
 
 	testcase_fn();
 	/*

Powered by blists - more mailing lists