linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rust: kasan/kbuild: fix missing flags on first build

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: <CANiq72niPycmVwHBfqttgD+X1qvg2L_P-=X79YEREUGLitqoaA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2025 23:53:01 +0200
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Matthew Maurer <mmaurer@...gle.com>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, 
	Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com>, Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, 
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>, 
	Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, 
	Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>, Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>, 
	Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>, 
	Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, 
	Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>, Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...il.com>, 
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>, Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>, 
	kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, 
	Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev, 
	Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rust: kasan/kbuild: fix missing flags on first build

On Wed, Apr 9, 2025 at 11:35 PM Matthew Maurer <mmaurer@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> The problem with this change is that some `rustc` flags will only be
> valid on some platforms. For example, if we check if a

Indeed -- this limitation is acknowledged in the commit message. The
priority is fixing the issue, not future features/needs, so I went
with this.

In any case, if we need to test a flag that requires the target, it is
likely we can do the check based on the Rust version, the
architecture, the Rust's LLVM version, etc.

As for `target.json`s, the plan is indeed to get rid of them, since
they are permanently unstable. So any features used by the
`target.json`s need to be requested to upstream Rust (e.g. flags) so
that we can do the same without a custom target specification, so that
eventually we can remove all of them (and thus `rustc-option` will
work in all cases again).

Thanks for taking a look!

Cheers,
Miguel