[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFztfTTVJG3ANetGh_9-iJg=gUeKt4wbibTy=c5DuH_udA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 13:19:19 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>, Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>, 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()
On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 1:14 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> It does not work with gcc-4.1.x, but works with gcc-4.4.x.
>
> I can't seem to see the errors any way, I wonder if
> __builtin_choose_expr() simply didn't exist back then.
No, that goes further back.
It seems to be -Wvla itself that doesn't exist in 4.1, so the test
build failed simply because I used that flag ;)
Linus
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.
