netdev - RE: [PATCH v5 0/2] Remove false-positive VLAs when using max()

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: <0e94e9582bec4373b5e21c612be179ac@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Mar 2018 09:43:13 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Linus Torvalds' <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
CC:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        "Randy Dunlap" <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Ian Abbott <abbotti@....co.uk>,
        linux-input <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v5 0/2] Remove false-positive VLAs when using max()

From: linus971@...il.com [mailto:linus971@...il.com] On Behalf Of Linus Torvalds
> Sent: 18 March 2018 23:36
...
> 
> Yeah, and since we're in the situation that *new* gcc versions work
> for us anyway, and we only have issues with older gcc's (that sadly
> people still use), even if there was a new cool feature we couldn't
> use it.

Is it necessary to have the full checks for old versions of gcc?

Even -Wvla could be predicated on very recent gcc - since we aren't
worried about whether gcc decides to generate a vla, but whether
the source requests one.

	David