linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] locking changes for v5.18

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: <CAHk-=wgaxDHAhxBkU_mVE5uw5po+qvzy4jgK8Q82rgi7XqZfiA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 25 Mar 2022 10:29:21 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] locking changes for v5.18

On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 4:42 AM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@...el.com> wrote:
>
> What about old one? I have already complained in the early discussion that
> `make W=1 ...` is broken by this change.

So that is REALLY D*MN EASY TO FIX.

If you use W=1, and don't want WERROR, then don't *do* that then.

End of story.

But that's on _you_. Not on the build system. If you use W=1 and
WERROR together, you get exactly what you asked for. It might even be
what you wanted, if you want to go through the warnings/errors as you
encounter them, instead of building everything.

And that's why I refuse to take the completely broken "strip out one
or the other automatically" change.

It's a perfectly valid combination to enable both.

But more importantly, -Werror is more important than W=1. So if
anything should be disabled, it's W=1.

Side note: that would be trivial to just have in the Kconfig files if
W=1 was just a config option.

Do something like

     config EXTRA_ERRORS
         int "Add extra compiler errors" if EXPERT
         depends on !WERROR
         range 0-2
         default 0

but note again: WERROR should be the thing that controls this and
should be on by default, not the other way around.

If you want EXTRA_ERRORS, you should not only be CONFIG_EXPERT, you
should also have to manually disable WERROR that *normal* people
should have on by default.

              Linus