linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tools/nolibc: Add stdbool.h to nolibc includes

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <440c9205-187e-45c1-8cc9-8083b64dadfc@igalia.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 11:37:39 -0300
From: André Almeida <andrealmeid@...lia.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, 'Thomas Weißschuh'
 <linux@...ssschuh.net>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
 kernel-dev@...lia.com, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools/nolibc: Add stdbool.h to nolibc includes

Hi Mark,

Em 25/09/2025 11:24, Mark Brown escreveu:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 11:14:23AM -0300, André Almeida wrote:
>> Add stdbool.h to the list of nolibc.h includes, otherwise tests compiled
>> with -nostdlib will fail with "error: unknown type name 'bool'", even if
>> a nolibc stdbool implementation is available at tools/include/nolibc/.
>>
>> Reported-by: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/833f5ae5-190e-47ec-9ad9-127ad166c80c@sirena.org.uk/
>> Signed-off-by: André Almeida <andrealmeid@...lia.com>
> 
> Fixes: f2662ec26b26 ("selftests: kselftest: Create ksft_print_dbg_msg()")
> 
>> ---
>>   tools/include/nolibc/nolibc.h | 1 +
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
>> --- a/tools/include/nolibc/nolibc.h
>> +++ b/tools/include/nolibc/nolibc.h
>> @@ -116,6 +116,7 @@
>>   #include "sched.h"
>>   #include "signal.h"
>>   #include "unistd.h"
>> +#include "stdbool.h"
>>   #include "stdio.h"
>>   #include "stdlib.h"
>>   #include "string.h"
> 
> It's not 100% clear to me that we should add this to the nolibc
> includes given that nolibc itself does not rely on or offer stdbool -
> I was going to send something out adjusting kselftest.h to unguard the
> include there.

If we don't include stdbool.h here, it looks like 
tools/include/nolibc/stdbool.h cannot be used by any test, and 
unguarding <stdbool.h> would defeat the purpose of using -nolibc?

I'm also not 100% sure as well, lets see if Thomas or Willy can shine a 
light here.