linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 16/25] init: lto: fix PREL32 relocations

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 15 Oct 2020 02:12:47 +0200
From:   Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
To:     Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
Cc:     Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
        Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 16/25] init: lto: fix PREL32 relocations

On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 2:34 AM Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com> wrote:
> With LTO, the compiler can rename static functions to avoid global
> naming collisions. As initcall functions are typically static,
> renaming can break references to them in inline assembly. This
> change adds a global stub with a stable name for each initcall to
> fix the issue when PREL32 relocations are used.

While I understand that this may be necessary for now, are there any
plans to fix this in the compiler in the future? There was a thread
about this issue at
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-April/thread.html#98047>,
and possible solutions were discussed there, but it looks like that
fizzled out...