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: <20210303203150.jwupthv6siil6tn2@treble>
Date:   Wed, 3 Mar 2021 14:31:50 -0600
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Justin Forbes <jforbes@...hat.com>,
        Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com>,
        Frank Eigler <fche@...hat.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] gcc-plugins: Handle GCC version mismatch for OOT
 modules

On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 02:24:12PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:57:33AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 11:38 AM Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > But in the meantime, making the plugins depend on the gcc version some
> > > > way is certainly better than not doing so.
> > >
> > > So currently, the plugins already so that.  They require the GCC version
> > > to be exact.  If there's a mismatch, then it fails the OOT module build.
> > 
> > That's not my experience.
> > 
> > Yes, the build fails, but it fails not by _rebuilding_, but by failing
> > with an error.
> 
> Um, that's what I said.  It does not rebuild.  It fails with an error.
> 
> The *proposal* is to rebuild the plugin -- which Masahiro nacked because
> he claims GCC mismatches aren't supported for OOT builds (plugin or
> not).
> 
> Your nack is for a different reason: GCC plugins are second-class
> citizens.  Fair enough...

Or was it a nack? :-)  Reading your message again, I may have
misinterpreted.  Put simply, should we rebuild plugins when the GCC
version changes?

-- 
Josh

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ