Subject: Re: [nfsd4] potentially hardware breaking regression in 4.14-rc and
 4.13.11
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Emese Revfy <re.emese@gmail.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Bruce Fields <bfields@redhat.com>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
        stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@leemhuis.info>,
        "kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com"
        <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>
References: <a17842c3-aae7-da98-424e-4441dd727e6d@gentoo.org>
 <40ad7c6e-f0d7-959a-bf29-d3e3843f5d31@gentoo.org>
 <CA+55aFwqUbd5xVno7tH+yYD=yeu4nBdY=mpZQ+3fA0OEPS_WtQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <23f7da04-95f7-24e7-ee70-ce40c5b8fee3@gentoo.org>
 <CA+55aFx63wq=qN0+P+S-aahq7HzvYLi1tSxhPT9x78E8BrMNGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <67939ef3-29c6-762c-7afe-46cc69630d95@gentoo.org>
 <ab1a286f-73dc-01aa-d797-0fef82534911@gentoo.org>
 <CA+55aFxw-ycca8+9ywckyXxH4dTggLJi5hXGdJtCQocjM86f5g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGXu5jL83V7hSpVLT69UTfgh3XkOsJw-S7Wc9_PQP7zGc8__rg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+55aFytWtipkgGtkZgzRTQqLPxG+QzJ2K9+oFdo9NVNXxB69g@mail.gmail.com>
 <3d948180-6bd7-c4e9-5ac8-5baef9cc15a7@gentoo.org>
 <CAGXu5jJBnJEPoUMQJTxxHXtHEUhpvq75xqzVdXsY5cKuHoe5Mg@mail.gmail.com>
 <09f2480f-e8e8-645b-6d94-b6ae4ca47806@gentoo.org>
 <CAGXu5jK=_BAKAAyhNms0MddJWPsLV2f78UWdnkxcSErmruhtNw@mail.gmail.com>
 <b2b323ae-447c-c44f-32a7-d9c1381545bf@gentoo.org>
 <CA+55aFwSfaqGN1R=N0c8fyFe-oengamdkTtnyomcCwG7f3HU5Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Patrick McLean <chutzpah@gentoo.org>
Message-ID: <242b16cd-056a-1499-2b65-69084dac1d8d@gentoo.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 17:54:03 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFwSfaqGN1R=N0c8fyFe-oengamdkTtnyomcCwG7f3HU5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org


On 2017-11-17 04:55 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Patrick McLean <chutzpah@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>
>> I am still getting the crash at d9e12200852d, I figured I would
>> double-check the "good" and "bad" kernels before starting a full bisect.
> 
> .. but without GCC_PLUGIN_RANDSTRUCT it's solid?

Yes, without GCC_PLUGIN_RANDSTRUCT it's solid.

> Kees removed even the baseline "randomize pure function pointer
> structures", so at that commit, nothing should be randomized.
> 
> But maybe the plugin code itself ends up confusing gcc somehow?
> 
> Even when it doesn't actually do that "relayout_struct()" on the
> structure, it always does those TYPE_ATTRIBUTES() games.