From: heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com (Heiko Carstens)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] ARM: uaccess: Implement strict user copy checks
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 17:47:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100824154740.GD2160@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201008241726.08797.arnd@arndb.de>
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 05:26:08PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 24 August 2010, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > > (Taking Martin and Heiko on Cc for s390)
> > >
> > > I'd strongly suggest making the behavior the same for everyone. It should
> > > be fairly easy to make sure none of these warnings ever triggers
> > > on s390, because most of the Linux device driver code does not get build
> > > there anyway.
> >
> > Please don't do that. An s390 allyesconfig still triggers 45 warnings and
> > I'm currently not willing to "patch" working code just to get rid of these
> > warnings which are most likely all false positives.
> > That's the reason why we currently don't error out and only generate
> > warnings.
>
> Can't you just turn that option off then? Or are you worried about
> allyesconfig builds?
I'd like to keep an allyesconfig compiling and booting.
With the proposed change we would never see a green entry at
http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/branch/9/ for s390's allyesconfig
build ;)
And it would make it a bit harder to find the usual !HAS_DMA and
!HAS_IOMEM build breakages we see quite frequently. No reason to make
it even more difficult to keep s390 compiling.
> The current state is confusing because on s390
> CONFIG_DEBUG_STRICT_USER_COPY_CHECKS means that gcc will warn rather
> than ignore the finding, while on all others, the same option turns
> a warning into an error.
Then maybe add a "choice" Kconfig option in a way that both allyesconfig
as well as allnoconfig will build?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: uaccess: Implement strict user copy checks
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 17:47:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100824154740.GD2160@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201008241726.08797.arnd@arndb.de>
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 05:26:08PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 24 August 2010, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > > (Taking Martin and Heiko on Cc for s390)
> > >
> > > I'd strongly suggest making the behavior the same for everyone. It should
> > > be fairly easy to make sure none of these warnings ever triggers
> > > on s390, because most of the Linux device driver code does not get build
> > > there anyway.
> >
> > Please don't do that. An s390 allyesconfig still triggers 45 warnings and
> > I'm currently not willing to "patch" working code just to get rid of these
> > warnings which are most likely all false positives.
> > That's the reason why we currently don't error out and only generate
> > warnings.
>
> Can't you just turn that option off then? Or are you worried about
> allyesconfig builds?
I'd like to keep an allyesconfig compiling and booting.
With the proposed change we would never see a green entry at
http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/branch/9/ for s390's allyesconfig
build ;)
And it would make it a bit harder to find the usual !HAS_DMA and
!HAS_IOMEM build breakages we see quite frequently. No reason to make
it even more difficult to keep s390 compiling.
> The current state is confusing because on s390
> CONFIG_DEBUG_STRICT_USER_COPY_CHECKS means that gcc will warn rather
> than ignore the finding, while on all others, the same option turns
> a warning into an error.
Then maybe add a "choice" Kconfig option in a way that both allyesconfig
as well as allnoconfig will build?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-24 15:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-04 3:02 [PATCH] ARM: uaccess: Implement strict user copy checks Stephen Boyd
2010-08-04 3:02 ` Stephen Boyd
2010-08-10 22:46 ` Stephen Boyd
2010-08-10 22:46 ` Stephen Boyd
2010-08-10 22:55 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-08-10 22:55 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-08-11 0:27 ` Stephen Boyd
2010-08-11 0:27 ` Stephen Boyd
2010-08-18 1:29 ` [PATCH v2] " Stephen Boyd
2010-08-18 1:29 ` Stephen Boyd
2010-08-18 12:28 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-08-18 12:28 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-08-18 19:48 ` Stephen Boyd
2010-08-18 19:48 ` Stephen Boyd
2010-08-19 11:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-08-19 11:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-08-24 15:06 ` Heiko Carstens
2010-08-24 15:06 ` Heiko Carstens
2010-08-24 15:26 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-08-24 15:26 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-08-24 15:47 ` Heiko Carstens [this message]
2010-08-24 15:47 ` Heiko Carstens
2010-08-25 12:14 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-08-25 12:14 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-08-25 12:54 ` Heiko Carstens
2010-08-25 12:54 ` Heiko Carstens
2010-08-25 13:55 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-08-25 13:55 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-08-25 14:40 ` Heiko Carstens
2010-08-25 14:40 ` Heiko Carstens
2010-08-28 1:35 ` Stephen Boyd
2010-08-28 1:35 ` Stephen Boyd
2010-08-28 7:43 ` Heiko Carstens
2010-08-28 7:43 ` Heiko Carstens
2010-08-28 9:56 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-08-28 9:56 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-09-04 4:49 ` Stephen Boyd
2010-09-04 4:49 ` Stephen Boyd
2010-09-14 3:07 ` Stephen Boyd
2010-09-14 3:07 ` Stephen Boyd
2010-09-14 8:25 ` Heiko Carstens
2010-09-14 8:25 ` Heiko Carstens
2010-09-14 13:10 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-09-14 13:10 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-09-14 14:18 ` Heiko Carstens
2010-09-14 14:18 ` Heiko Carstens
2010-08-19 2:28 ` [PATCHv2 2/1] Consolidate CONFIG_DEBUG_STRICT_USER_COPY_CHECKS Stephen Boyd
2010-08-19 2:28 ` Stephen Boyd
2010-08-19 4:38 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-08-19 4:38 ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-08-19 4:47 ` Stephen Rothwell
2010-08-19 4:47 ` Stephen Rothwell
2010-08-19 11:04 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-08-19 11:04 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-08-11 3:04 ` [PATCH] ARM: uaccess: Implement strict user copy checks Arnd Bergmann
2010-08-11 3:04 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-08-11 18:46 ` Stephen Boyd
2010-08-11 18:46 ` Stephen Boyd
2010-08-12 15:00 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-08-12 15:00 ` Arnd Bergmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100824154740.GD2160@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com \
--to=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.