linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: alternatives: Move length validation in alternative

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]

Date:   Thu, 15 Apr 2021 15:02:25 +0100
From:   Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To:     Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
Cc:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
        Jian Cai <jiancai@...gle.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: alternatives: Move length validation in
 alternative_{insn,endif}

On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 06:25:57AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 10:17:43AM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 05:08:04PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> > > After commit 2decad92f473 ("arm64: mte: Ensure TIF_MTE_ASYNC_FAULT is
> > > set atomically"), LLVM's integrated assembler fails to build entry.S:
> > > 
> > > <instantiation>:5:7: error: expected assembly-time absolute expression
> > >  .org . - (664b-663b) + (662b-661b)
> > >       ^
> > > <instantiation>:6:7: error: expected assembly-time absolute expression
> > >  .org . - (662b-661b) + (664b-663b)
> > >       ^
> > 
> > I tried the latest Linus' tree and linux-next (defconfig) with this
> > commit in and I can't get your build error. I used both clang-10 from
> > Debian stable and clang-11 from Debian sid. So, which clang version did
> > you use or which kernel config options?
> 
> Interesting, this reproduces for me with LLVM 12 or newer with just
> defconfig.

It fails for me as well with clang-12. Do you happen to know why it
works fine with previous clang versions?

-- 
Catalin