linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] loongarch: Only select HAVE_OBJTOOL and allow ORC unwinder if the inline assembler supports R_LARCH_{32,64}

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: Sat, 15 Jun 2024 18:22:14 +0800
From: Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...111.site>
To: Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>
Cc: Jinyang He <hejinyang@...ngson.cn>, Nathan Chancellor
 <nathan@...nel.org>,  Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, WANG Xuerui
 <kernel@...0n.name>, Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>,  Nick
 Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>, Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>,
 Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>,  Youling Tang
 <tangyouling@...inos.cn>, loongarch@...ts.linux.dev,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,  llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
 mengqinggang@...ngson.cn, cailulu@...ngson.cn,  wanglei@...ngson.cn,
 luweining@...ngson.cn, Yujie Liu <yujie.liu@...el.com>,  Heng Qi
 <hengqi@...ux.alibaba.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] loongarch: Only select HAVE_OBJTOOL and allow ORC
 unwinder if the inline assembler supports R_LARCH_{32,64}_PCREL

On Sat, 2024-06-15 at 17:33 +0800, Huacai Chen wrote:
> > To me for now we should just make OBJTOOL and ORC depend on BROKEN and
> > backport to stable...
> But this patch allows clang to build objtool, which seems broken, too.

Yes, so I mean make objtool depend on CONFIG_BROKEN because it is indeed
broken as at now.

Or we'll end up at least:

select HAVE_OBJTOOL if AS_HAS_EXPLICIT_RELOCS && AS_HAS_THIN_ADD_SUB && !CC_IS_CLANG && !RUST

this is already nasty and I still don't know if it covers all broken
cases (I've no idea if GCC will generate frame pointer in some cases as
well...)

> > Even if we can fix both the -mno-thin-add-sub problem and the frame
> > pointer problem in these weeks, they'll be some nontrivial large change
> > and improper to backport.  Thus we have to admit objtool doesn't really
> > work for old releases and mark it broken.
> I don't like to disable objtool, unless there is no better solution.
> And it seems there has already been some "large fix" in objtool's
> history.

Then we can still backport the large fix to the stable branches when we
finish it up.

-- 
Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...111.site>
School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University