linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix CFI failures with GCOV_PROFILE

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 24 Jun 2023 17:43:28 +0900
From:   Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>
To:     Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>, Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>,
        linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix CFI failures with GCOV_PROFILE_ALL

On Sat, Jun 24, 2023 at 5:39 AM Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 9:32 AM Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 12:11:41AM +0000, Sami Tolvanen wrote:
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > The following two patches fix CFI failures with GCOV_PROFILE_ALL,
> > > where the compiler injects indirectly called functions to object
> > > files that otherwise contain no executable code, and are not
> > > processed by objtool or don't have CFI enabled. This results in
> > > missing or incorrect type hashes during boot and when modules are
> > > loaded.
> > >
> > > Sami Tolvanen (2):
> > >   kbuild: Fix CFI failures with GCOV
> > >   kbuild: Disable GCOV for *.mod.o
> > >
> > >  init/Makefile             | 1 +
> > >  scripts/Makefile.modfinal | 2 +-
> > >  scripts/Makefile.vmlinux  | 1 +
> > >  3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > Nice hunting!
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> >
> > Should these get Cc: stable tags maybe?
>
> I was under the impression that Fixes: tags would be sufficient these
> days, but agreed, explicit Cc: probably wouldn't hurt.
>
> Sami


Both applied to linux-kbuild.

I also think Fixes: tags would be enough
to make them back-ported.


-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada