linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/15] static_call: Use global functions for the self-test

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:   Sat, 17 Apr 2021 02:16:54 +0200
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>, x86@...nel.org
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>,
        linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com,
        Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/15] static_call: Use global functions for the self-test

On Fri, Apr 16 2021 at 23:37, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 16 2021 at 13:38, Sami Tolvanen wrote:
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_STATIC_CALL_SELFTEST
>>  
>> -static int func_a(int x)
>> +int func_a(int x)
>>  {
>>  	return x+1;
>>  }
>>  
>> -static int func_b(int x)
>> +int func_b(int x)
>>  {
>>  	return x+2;
>>  }
>
> Did you even compile that?
>
> Global functions without a prototype are generating warnings, but we can
> ignore them just because of sekurity, right?
>
> Aside of that polluting the global namespace with func_a/b just to work
> around a tool shortcoming is beyond hillarious.
>
> Fix the tool not the perfectly correct code.

That said, I wouldn't mind a  __dont_dare_to_rename annotation to help
the compiler, but anything else is just wrong.

Thanks,

        tglx