linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/28] 6.1.10-rc1 review

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: <Y+AIsz4/7Ms28aWK@dev-arch.thelio-3990X>
Date:   Sun, 5 Feb 2023 12:51:15 -0700
From:   Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
To:     Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux@...ck-us.net, shuah@...nel.org,
        patches@...nelci.org, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, pavel@...x.de,
        jonathanh@...dia.com, f.fainelli@...il.com,
        sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com, srw@...dewatkins.net, rwarsow@....de,
        llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.1 00/28] 6.1.10-rc1 review

Hi Naresh,

On Sat, Feb 04, 2023 at 12:55:10PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 at 15:50, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.10 release.
> > There are 28 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> > to this one.  If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> > let me know.
> >
> > Responses should be made by Sun, 05 Feb 2023 10:09:58 +0000.
> > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> >
> > The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
> >         https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v6.x/stable-review/patch-6.1.10-rc1.gz
> > or in the git tree and branch at:
> >         git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-6.1.y
> > and the diffstat can be found below.
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > greg k-h
> 
> 
> Results from Linaro’s test farm.
> No regressions on arm64, arm, x86_64, and i386.
> 
> Tested-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@...aro.org>
> 
> NOTE:
> 
> clang-nightly-allmodconfig - Failed
> 
> Build error:
> -----------
>   include/linux/fortify-string.h:430:4: error: call to '__write_overflow_field'
>    declared with 'warning' attribute: detected write beyond size of field
>    (1st parameter); maybe use struct_group()? [-Werror,-Wattribute-warning]
> 
> This is already reported upstream,
> https://lore.kernel.org/llvm/63d0c141.050a0220.c848b.4e93@mx.google.com/

I think you copied the wrong warning, as the one upstream is a write
warning, whereas the one I see in your build logs is a read error:

In file included from /builds/linux/drivers/infiniband/core/cma.c:9:
In file included from /builds/linux/include/linux/completion.h:12:
In file included from /builds/linux/include/linux/swait.h:7:
In file included from /builds/linux/include/linux/spinlock.h:56:
In file included from /builds/linux/include/linux/preempt.h:78:
In file included from /builds/linux/arch/x86/include/asm/preempt.h:7:
In file included from /builds/linux/include/linux/thread_info.h:60:
In file included from /builds/linux/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h:53:
In file included from /builds/linux/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeature.h:5:
In file included from /builds/linux/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h:22:
In file included from /builds/linux/arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h:11:
In file included from /builds/linux/arch/x86/include/asm/cpumask.h:5:
In file included from /builds/linux/include/linux/cpumask.h:12:
In file included from /builds/linux/include/linux/bitmap.h:11:
In file included from /builds/linux/include/linux/string.h:253:
/builds/linux/include/linux/fortify-string.h:543:4: error: call to '__read_overflow' declared with 'error' attribute: detected read beyond size of object (1st parameter)
                        __read_overflow();
                        ^

Regardless, this is still a clang bug that we are actively investigating, so it
can still be safely ignored by the kernel folks.

https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/1687

Cheers,
Nathan