linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] objtool: Make objtool check actually fatal upon fatal errors

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: Mon, 8 Jan 2024 10:15:34 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Dimitri John Ledkov <dimitri.ledkov@...onical.com>
Cc: jpoimboe@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] objtool: Make objtool check actually fatal upon
 fatal errors


* Dimitri John Ledkov <dimitri.ledkov@...onical.com> wrote:

> Currently function calls within check() are sensitive to fatal errors
> (negative return codes) and abort execution prematurely. However, in
> all such cases the check() function still returns 0, and thus
> resulting in a successful kernel build.
> 
> The only correct code paths were the ones that escpae the control flow
> with `return ret`.
> 
> Make the check() function return `ret` status code, and make all
> negative return codes goto that instruction. This makes fatal errors
> (not warnings) from various function calls actually fail the
> build. E.g. if create_retpoline_sites_sections() fails to create elf
> section pair retpoline_sites the tool now exits with an error code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dimitri John Ledkov <dimitri.ledkov@...onical.com>

So, is this not expected to be the case anymore:

>  out:
> -	/*
> -	 *  For now, don't fail the kernel build on fatal warnings.  These
> -	 *  errors are still fairly common due to the growing matrix of
> -	 *  supported toolchains and their recent pace of change.
> -	 */
> -	return 0;

?

How about making it only fatal if CONFIG_WERROR=y, ie. an analogue to our 
treatment of compiler warnings?

Thanks,

	Ingo