linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC] gcc-plugins: Handle GCC version mismatch for OOT modules

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: <20210127185113.c3est2vssf5tlyyq@treble>
Date:   Wed, 27 Jan 2021 12:51:13 -0600
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Justin Forbes <jforbes@...hat.com>,
        Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] gcc-plugins: Handle GCC version mismatch for OOT
 modules

On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 06:43:27PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 12:38:56PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 06:02:15PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > Please don't add all this garbage.  We only add infrastructure to the
> > > kernel for what the kernel itself needs, not for weird out of tree
> > > infrastructure.
> > 
> > This isn't new, the kernel already has the infrastructure for building
> > out-of-tree modules.  It's widely used.  Are you suggesting we remove
> > it?  Good luck with that...
> > 
> > Either it should be supported, or not.  Make the case either way.  But I
> > can't understand why people are advocating to leave it half-broken.
> 
> 
> It is not support as any kind of interface.  It is a little aid for
> local development.

Is this a joke?  I've never met anybody who builds OOT modules as a
development aid...

On the other hand I know of several very popular distros (some paid,
some not) who rely on allowing users/partners to build OOT modules as
part of their ecosystem.  To say it's not supported is a farce.

-- 
Josh