linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 08/41] arm64: Replace __ASSEMBLY__ with __ASSEMBLER_

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: <20250314115554.GA8986@willie-the-truck>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 11:55:55 +0000
From: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To: Thomas Huth <thuth@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/41] arm64: Replace __ASSEMBLY__ with __ASSEMBLER__ in
 uapi headers

On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 08:09:39AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
> __ASSEMBLY__ is only defined by the Makefile of the kernel, so
> this is not really useful for uapi headers (unless the userspace
> Makefile defines it, too). Let's switch to __ASSEMBLER__ which
> gets set automatically by the compiler when compiling assembly
> code.
> 
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@...hat.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h        | 2 +-
>  arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/ptrace.h     | 4 ++--
>  arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/sigcontext.h | 4 ++--
>  3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

Is there a risk of breaking userspace with this? I wonder if it would
be more conservative to do something like:

#if !defined(__ASSEMBLY__) && !defined(__ASSEMBLER__)

so that if somebody is doing '#define __ASSEMBLY__' then they get the
same behaviour as today.

Or maybe we don't care?

Will