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:   Fri, 15 Oct 2021 10:11:16 +0200
From:   Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
To:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] compiler_types: mark __compiletime_assert failure as
 __noreturn

On 14/10/2021 19.48, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 8:02 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>>

> I'm not sure how worthwhile that yakshave would be, 

A yakshave that would be worthwhile is to kill off the macro
compiletime_assert() completely - three is a crowd. It sounds like it
would be implemented in terms of _Static_assert, but it's actually
__attribute__(error). We can fold the definition of compiletime_assert
into BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG.

The users in rwonce.h should just be changed to static_assert, and then
there are very few random users left, which can either be static_assert
or BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG.

Why do we even have a no-op version if !__OPTIMIZE__? AFAIK there's no
CONFIG_O0 option, and such a build wouldn't be interesting at all - it
can't be expected to boot, and it would likely throw warnings left and
right.

Rasmus

Powered by blists - more mailing lists