[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZxaI7EcpK3HIm0by@archlinux>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 19:01:32 +0200
From: Jan Hendrik Farr <kernel@...rr.cc>
To: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>,
Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>,
Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@...lux.com>, kent.overstreet@...ux.dev,
regressions@...ts.linux.dev, linux-bcachefs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
ardb@...nel.org, ojeda@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION][BISECTED] erroneous buffer overflow detected in
bch2_xattr_validate
On 21 08:04:03, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> > Also after gcc 15 is released I don't think a version check for gcc
> > should be necessary. I only see an explicit version check as required
> > when we know a certain version is broken. Otherwise I would prefer using
> > the build test.
>
> Yeah, build tests are nice, although they require spawning a process
> and so on, which (as far as I understand) we try to minimize. Version
> checks also have the advantage that it is easy to remember/check when
> we can remove the checks themselves when we upgrade the minimum
> versions.
>
If the goal is to minimize the need for build tests, I think we should
go with Nathan's suggestion of keeping the build test for now (to
support pre-release gcc versions) and remove it and just go with
versions checks for both gcc and clang once gcc 15 is released.
Best Regards
Jan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists