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  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]
Date:   Fri, 24 Jan 2020 21:27:11 +0100
From:   Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <>
To:     Palmer Dabbelt <>,,,
        Palmer Dabbelt <>,,,, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/bpf: Elide a check for LLVM versions that can't compile it

Palmer Dabbelt <> writes:

> The current stable LLVM BPF backend fails to compile the BPF selftests
> due to a compiler bug.  The bug has been fixed in trunk, but that fix
> hasn't landed in the binary packages I'm using yet (Fedora arm64).
> Without this workaround the tests don't compile for me.
> This patch triggers a preprocessor warning on LLVM versions that
> definitely have the bug.  The test may be conservative (ie, I'm not sure
> if 9.1 will have the fix), but it should at least make the current set
> of stable releases work together.
> See for more information on the fix.  I
> obtained the workaround from
> Fixes: 20a9ad2e7136 ("selftests/bpf: add CO-RE relocs array tests")
> Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt <>

Having to depend on the latest trunk llvm to compile the selftests is
definitely unfortunate. I believe there are some tests that won't work
at all without trunk llvm (the fentry/fexit stuff comes to mind;
although I'm not sure if they'll fail to compile, just fail to run?).
Could we extend this type of checking to any such case?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists