kernel-hardening - Re: [PATCH v6] kernel.h: Retain constant expression output for max()/min()

Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180331053434.akno723avvcri654@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2018 07:34:34 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Martin Uecker <Martin.Uecker@....uni-goettingen.de>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
	Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
	Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
	David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
	Ian Abbott <abbotti@....co.uk>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] kernel.h: Retain constant expression output for
 max()/min()


* Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 10:47 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > * Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> >
> >> In the effort to remove all VLAs from the kernel[1], it is desirable to
> >> build with -Wvla. However, this warning is overly pessimistic, in that
> >> it is only happy with stack array sizes that are declared as constant
> >> expressions, and not constant values. One case of this is the evaluation
> >> of the max() macro which, due to its construction, ends up converting
> >> constant expression arguments into a constant value result.
> >>
> >> All attempts to rewrite this macro with __builtin_constant_p() failed with
> >> older compilers (e.g. gcc 4.4)[2]. However, Martin Uecker constructed[3] a
> >> mind-shattering solution that works everywhere. Cthulhu fhtagn!
> >>
> >> This patch updates the min()/max() macros to evaluate to a constant
> >> expression when called on constant expression arguments. This removes
> >> several false-positive stack VLA warnings from an x86 allmodconfig
> >> build when -Wvla is added:
> >
> > Cool!
> >
> > Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
> >
> > How many warnings are left in an allmodconfig build?
> 
> For -Wvla? Out of the original 112 files with VLAs, 42 haven't had a
> patch applied yet. Doing a linux-next allmodconfig build with the
> max() patch and my latest ecc patch, we've gone from 316 warning
> instances to 205. More than half of those are in
> include/crypto/skcipher.h and include/crypto/hash.h.

Great - once the number of warnings is zero, is the plan to enable the warning 
unconditionally?

Thanks,

	Ingo

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.