linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] gcc-plugins: Remove SANCOV plugin

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: <202504091321.2B7E95FE@keescook>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2025 13:21:58 -0700
From: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
	Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
	Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...il.com>,
	linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org,
	kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>,
	Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gcc-plugins: Remove SANCOV plugin

On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 09:28:22PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2025, at 18:19, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 06:16:58PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >> On Wed, Apr 9, 2025, at 18:02, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> 
> >> >  config KCOV
> >> >  	bool "Code coverage for fuzzing"
> >> >  	depends on ARCH_HAS_KCOV
> >> > -	depends on CC_HAS_SANCOV_TRACE_PC || GCC_PLUGINS
> >> > +	depends on CC_HAS_SANCOV_TRACE_PC
> >> 
> >> So this dependency would also disappear. I think either way is fine.
> >> 
> >> The rest of the patch is again identical to my version.
> >
> > Ah! How about you keep the patch as part of your gcc-8.1 clean up, then?
> > That seems more clear, etc.
> 
> Sure, I can probably keep that all in a branch of the asm-generic
> tree, or alternatively send it through the kbuild tree.
> 
> Shall I include the patch to remove the structleak plugin as well?

No, structleak needs to stay for now.

-- 
Kees Cook