netdev - Re: kernel/bpf/verifier.c: 4 * possible unintended fallthrough ?

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1482258523.24490.10@smtp.office365.com>
Date:   Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:28:43 -0500
From:   Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>
To:     David Binderman <dcb314@...mail.com>
CC:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
        "ast@...nel.org" <ast@...nel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kernel/bpf/verifier.c: 4 * possible unintended fallthrough ?

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:34 AM, David Binderman <dcb314@...mail.com> 
wrote:
> 
> Hello there,
> 
>> From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
>> I've tried 4.9 and 5.2 and don't see this warning.
> 
> As expected - I used a development version of gcc.
> Latest released version is 6.2
> 
>> Is this 6.x gcc?
> 
> 7.0 would be more accurate.
> 
>> I suspect it will have such warnings all over the kernel.
> 
> Indeed it has hundreds, but the subject under discussion is file
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c.
> 
> I am still not sure if I have found a fallthrough bug or not.

You haven't, this is intended so is a useless warning.  Thanks,

Josef