[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKwvOdm72j2MQPbXY5eYLj5r-9toOJd+GB2=P6z1_L7SghazZg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2017 15:04:25 -0800
From: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: "Tobin C. Harding" <me@...in.cc>, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] vla: add VLA macro and testing
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> While I'd certainly like to see SOME kind of sanity checking for VLAs,
> my preference would be to entirely eliminate them at get -Werror=vla
> added to the Makefile. Even Linus has expressed irritation over the
> idea of VLAs in structs in the past:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/23/500
VLAIS makes it difficult (impossible) to compile allyesconfig with
clang. VLA on the stack is fine, but VLAIS is not.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
