linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] powerpc/boot: Use address-of operator on section symbols

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: <CAMuHMdU_KfQ-RT_nev5LgN=Vj_P97Fn=nwRoC6ZREFLa3Ysj7w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 18 Jul 2020 09:50:50 +0200
From:   Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To:     Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>
Cc:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Geoff Levand <geoff@...radead.org>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
        Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/boot: Use address-of operator on section symbols

Hi Nathan,

On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 6:02 AM Nathan Chancellor
<natechancellor@...il.com> wrote:
> arch/powerpc/boot/main.c:107:18: warning: array comparison always
> evaluates to a constant [-Wtautological-compare]
>         if (_initrd_end > _initrd_start) {
>                         ^
> arch/powerpc/boot/main.c:155:20: warning: array comparison always
> evaluates to a constant [-Wtautological-compare]
>         if (_esm_blob_end <= _esm_blob_start)
>                           ^
> 2 warnings generated.
>
> These are not true arrays, they are linker defined symbols, which are
> just addresses.  Using the address of operator silences the warning
> and does not change the resulting assembly with either clang/ld.lld
> or gcc/ld (tested with diff + objdump -Dr).
>
> Link: https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/212
> Reported-by: Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>
> Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>
> ---
>  arch/powerpc/boot/main.c | 4 ++--
>  arch/powerpc/boot/ps3.c  | 2 +-
>  2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/main.c b/arch/powerpc/boot/main.c
> index a9d209135975..cae31a6e8f02 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/boot/main.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/boot/main.c
> @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ static struct addr_range prep_initrd(struct addr_range vmlinux, void *chosen,
>  {
>         /* If we have an image attached to us, it overrides anything
>          * supplied by the loader. */
> -       if (_initrd_end > _initrd_start) {
> +       if (&_initrd_end > &_initrd_start) {
>

Are you sure that fix is correct?

    extern char _initrd_start[];
    extern char _initrd_end[];
    extern char _esm_blob_start[];
    extern char _esm_blob_end[];

Of course the result of their comparison is a constant, as the addresses
are constant.  If clangs warns about it, perhaps that warning should be moved
to W=1?

But adding "&" is not correct, according to C.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds