linux-kernel - Re: Commit 0d989ac2c90b broke my x86-64 build.

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: <CAK7LNAQFEi=4nky4nxRA8s+ODaf89Wa5kwDhe9dppKWX0UiFJA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 25 Oct 2021 03:13:40 +0900
From:   Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>
To:     Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Commit 0d989ac2c90b broke my x86-64 build.

On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 3:36 PM Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net> wrote:
>
> The attached config built fine before the above commit, doesn't build after. The
> commit in question did nothing except remove support for building x86-64 without
> libelf.

You enable CONFIG_STACK_VALIDATION in your .config file.
At least, you observed
"warning: Cannot use CONFIG_STACK_VALIDATION=y, please install
libelf-dev, libelf-devel or elfutils-libelf-devel"
in the previous builds.


>
> It took me a while to notice because the commit ONLY broke x86-64. I can still
> build arm (32 and 64 bit), i686, m68k, mips/mipsel, powerpc, s390x, and sh4
> without libelf in my cross compiler. Heck, I can still build i686. The change
> seems to have added a unique build dependency to just x86-64.

The other architectures are not affected because you cannot enable
CONFIG_STACK_VALIDATION.

Please note only x86_64 selects HAVE_STACK_VALIDATION.


> Rob
>
> P.S. Why do you need a special library to parse elf anyway? It's a fairly simple
> file format, linux has include/linux.elf.h, the toolchain already has an objtool
> prefixed for the appropriate cross compiler...

You are asking a question about the objtool implementation.
CCed Josh Poimboeuf.


-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada