linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] gcc-plugins: Disable GCC plugins for compile test builds

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: <CAHk-=wjTbWiYwfj2wF9iP8SSVk2A_cZFDr5hu1bgU_PfxhyiiA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2025 14:33:40 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>, Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>, 
	Günther Noack <gnoack@...gle.com>, 
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gcc-plugins: Disable GCC plugins for compile test builds

On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 at 14:10, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Arnd bisected this to c56f649646ec ("landlock: Log mount-related
> denials") but that commit is fairly obviously not really at fault here,
> most likely this is an issue in the plugin.  Given how disruptive having
> key configs like this failing let's disable the plugins for compile test
> builds until a fix is found.

I'm not against this, but I do want to bring up the "are the plugins
worth having at all" discussion again.

They've been a pain before. Afaik, the actual useful cases are now
done by actual real compiler support (and by clang, at that).

Who actually *uses* the gcc plugins? They just worry me in general,
and this is not the first time they have caused ICE problems.

            Linus