Received: by 10.223.185.116 with SMTP id b49csp1365260wrg; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 10:15:12 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x226gh93U9EQdRjwrOCh+Dm1611zKGBEEOyoGv2KH3FvnVVyYuyTrFc0eeqIOltPACCbFayBt X-Received: by 10.99.191.78 with SMTP id i14mr7691452pgo.9.1518372912116; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 10:15:12 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1518372912; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=w/7qKIAUQ61+D4cM/myIt9cVN6AlAH5Z7Y8LFUyFJITm2167lDbxAfGVx1ob+OUViH eRM68xc2i/KFvg1Ca/zkUosSVnFtGU6jZxpjAQ+g1CffVOkJgZW95NJjqFjZ8g5jRn9M MOnTqA3w5fnj1AFbhctp7CrhSOpAeNiko9O/TZ9AeVETMSpGDwQAs7GotHwbhY0r1iyM cq8BGGNkiaa15WLzrDyHpx/HIaaw92sW6rHJ48cPXSqJHzi69Zjy4UTxZNBHDjK4kOxV ipjsl0jo3K8d3GPYvXdkXZYgQhoCitass7pdRweEIzUn6tzyhZPef7WDaUZ9/eTitB4+ Ebfw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :references:in-reply-to:mime-version:dkim-signature :arc-authentication-results; bh=ensroHXk+n1FOLiBDDOVMv+Oa9a0Jc5DOhizPS1Hosw=; b=uRIkGdcGEYT/XJaOclh/LmI69UFBF0/ycrJH2Lqvo6CS262v8JvHtVFyCg/YGGVahj C4fF3YJy+iw/vCzRcKBuCPHRJbJNehUTkT/euxhStxjKYl1L04qzbkRS0Af9G614ejr9 KoIQiBgz9G37vCb/Rs6Ehbnq7MBK+p6litsHDUSTpjzcZdxLN+wZsol39hQVo8WP7UzV mt5xtf0JGp9uvdtfFK1Uelx6dSlN/dPZJjljls2xGgCtPQwQIRSfgSNATyPoGgUM8gzp HSR8jWHmO+en3kgYcGFVJ8maglMKrwPksQMCAE8D2K71DISkOOnkRZXBSOCUz6W+JTVm Ee3Q== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=pIFZxsRI; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id s1si5113773pfk.26.2018.02.11.10.14.47; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 10:15:12 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=pIFZxsRI; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753600AbeBKSNs (ORCPT + 99 others); Sun, 11 Feb 2018 13:13:48 -0500 Received: from mail-it0-f66.google.com ([209.85.214.66]:35322 "EHLO mail-it0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753126AbeBKSNq (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Feb 2018 13:13:46 -0500 Received: by mail-it0-f66.google.com with SMTP id e1so4044750ita.0; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 10:13:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=ensroHXk+n1FOLiBDDOVMv+Oa9a0Jc5DOhizPS1Hosw=; b=pIFZxsRIKLEPRXJF+d3SHD1ioUVi4SPZo6xtiq5cRdz4Jpdxy/Az72aUF0r+rUZML+ I9sfL0NzQzMf5jTaVYIgQDfKOCwdEOBFuPHjKsevbutv7Q+fo5nYFy0WY2Rt0py2UfaK OBRgaFxb8cm7DvaXqrpFd3bIYnDxyaz650cESyOSInagnfMNDwanc+oec6NzBOjAsdhu okJVJB8yX17HEx5vgqgqAgHSzOR8/DrCWwvwt4g77WSpDb6QY7xowaA+SxCX5Ax2h4I5 c1te9FKbw2VRKZDCgkL6OixAUFHwumG85nFR8Skfy2r6ilUsmJd4jE6x9YXYnQbw1bwW eNRw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ensroHXk+n1FOLiBDDOVMv+Oa9a0Jc5DOhizPS1Hosw=; b=ReouNm6RP6LRKcku7DWS4OUqL03Zg6gnxcRb2hRHK8kk2iEwu9CeUxcmOsRwqTTKtP NrsT/Sz0m7TnkyD4v0TZ1mcozvzEd/1j3pDoC46wZSdWhc341KqOwChT/Eex4TYOSLM0 jS1Vzb3ZznM1k+lvL34mrP5jfq7Di5pwdPk2U6vY7XqxBZK9hfx2F+j4pP1qTtASP02D ycxhmXnUHP0NAVJoiUvYe5ntLe/vcKYrMxFdyV7UcfmFdjv/MITZJ818GM5ib6lswHpq vh0YtsBt0rdvv0x6HiVMk8mcJpjZhglbC/jo9saGVSiZHmGiRntmkG0Tap3vroZ+yGRt zNVw== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPD/PvKDNjE01MGEghhHVacPC2lgKHUW4CUBvTeooSGZX0Lx6fjR mFKpqB1onoo2LJMLY033IaLBt5lvdlhV3lc4fBs= X-Received: by 10.36.238.194 with SMTP id b185mr2733164iti.100.1518372825106; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 10:13:45 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.59.196 with HTTP; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 10:13:44 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20180210054843.z3g7wvcmlccvww3h@huvuddator> <20180210074924.3nhxsza5zdbaahxx@huvuddator> <20180210080556.mycqsjhxbaguwhay@huvuddator> <20180210085519.737ckf4bcl57h4g2@huvuddator> <20180211103432.pf2ot6nd7nbhdhsy@huvuddator> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2018 10:13:44 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 4DMzD37dyilSWvyyo4QnPEOd4_A Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/7] kconfig: support new special property shell= To: Kees Cook Cc: Ulf Magnusson , Masahiro Yamada , Linux Kbuild mailing list , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Andrew Morton , Nicolas Pitre , "Luis R . Rodriguez" , Randy Dunlap , Sam Ravnborg , Michal Marek , Martin Schwidefsky , Pavel Machek , linux-s390 , Jiri Kosina , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Tejun Heo , Ingo Molnar , "Van De Ven, Arjan" , Arnd Bergmann Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 9:56 AM, Kees Cook wrote: > >> - How common are those broken compilers? > > I *thought* it was rare (i.e. gcc 4.2) but while working on ..._AUTO I > found breakage in akpm's 4.4 gcc, and all of Arnd's gccs due to some > very strange misconfiguration between the gcc build environment and > other options. So, it turns out this is unfortunately common. The good > news is that it does NOT appear to happen with most distro compilers, > though I've seen Android's compiler regress the global vs %gs at least > once about a year ago. Hmm. Ok, so it's not *that* common, and won't affect normal people. That actually sounds like we could just (a) make gcc 4.5 be the minimum required version (b) actually error out if we find a bad compiler Upgrading the minimum required gcc version to 4.5 is pretty much going to happen _anyway_, because we're starting to rely on "asm goto" for avoiding speculation. End result: maybe we can make the configuration phase just use the standard "does gcc support this flag" logic, and then just have a separate script that is run to validate that gcc doesn't generate garbage, and error out loudly if it does. Linus