Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f182.google.com ([209.85.223.182]:47169 "EHLO mail-io0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751690AbdKKRbf (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Nov 2017 12:31:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20171109193715.GB21978@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <40ad7c6e-f0d7-959a-bf29-d3e3843f5d31@gentoo.org> <23f7da04-95f7-24e7-ee70-ce40c5b8fee3@gentoo.org> <67939ef3-29c6-762c-7afe-46cc69630d95@gentoo.org> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2017 09:31:34 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [nfsd4] potentially hardware breaking regression in 4.14-rc and 4.13.11 To: Kees Cook Cc: Patrick McLean , Emese Revfy , Al Viro , Bruce Fields , "Darrick J. Wong" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux NFS Mailing List , stable , Thorsten Leemhuis , "kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Boris Lukashev points out that Patrick should probably check a newer version of gcc. I looked around, and in one of the emails, Patrick said: "No changes, both the working and broken kernels were built with distro-provided gcc 5.4.0 and binutils 2.28.1" and gcc-5.4.0 is certainly not very recent. It's not _ancient_, but it's a bug-fix release to a pretty old branch that is not exactly new. It would probably be good to check if the problems persist with gcc 6.x or 7.x.. I have no idea which gcc version the randstruct people tend to use themselves. Linus On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 8:13 AM, Kees Cook wrote: > > I'll take a closer look at this and see if I can provide something to > narrow it down.