linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] gcov,x86: Mark GCOV broken for x86

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: <YMeeBJKJhddzReGe@zn.tnic>
Date:   Mon, 14 Jun 2021 20:20:52 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gcov,x86: Mark GCOV broken for x86

On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 11:05:35AM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> __attribute__((no_instrument_function)) is already wired to not emit
> calls to mcount()/fentry().  I think extending it to also apply to
> coverage (-fprofile-arcs) and instrumentation based profiling
> (-fprofile-generate) is reasonable.

Is anyone going to ping the gcc folks so that they do it too or should
we open a bug over there simply?

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette