From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D5B834BA35 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2025 00:03:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758845008; cv=none; b=rcvDTkREuh6JrO8DahuurRz0XmEGFP0MF20VQHy8qD/JJbF6pe24fufYBGzC+7tKwGp84Zm7WKzFDxuKC4AGexHnrvQGInWCyT/jUogHFQnH3EqpPGVaUXbcEigkDMez13tB7NjjQ/dVUL2Oso95k43DuR1CkW8XJnR9rNoVF6g= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758845008; c=relaxed/simple; bh=dIp//LwVCbYYymqTBM3qS8qb2jP/eg0Jf9aiSto0fc4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=AUzU4n4drAY/+/hzZ8UPsTpOqwTYv/vcKi2J6yb946nGZ9uukGg8q9hB+2mCEnUcGyr56VpIYmDErwLEvpamiPzT0sappYXZmlCP+eznICzSnAXTXW0/Je/lgoNjnUZHI8X8icxlvmpLzS8Q3d9jyAoLmH2CrlYy4n6B7AV7stU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=DU4HQhb8; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="DU4HQhb8" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 78531C4CEF0; Fri, 26 Sep 2025 00:03:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1758845007; bh=dIp//LwVCbYYymqTBM3qS8qb2jP/eg0Jf9aiSto0fc4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=DU4HQhb8sdQyEfF/dpL4osDMBgVOjnrRjg0i73ARw8Y/vL3AXKOgMFkd/nM1A9ZYo 09+SrWe0/B2UTD26q96jv82st4jaUtNPTXiSBlevCLRNjJuyj4/SgTLeffQGNGtcA0 hWLV6kviZk70UEES6ehhsMXOnXO6OnWE3CBB2UsAyiaoKDnXpe9EhDYWhnbuyvCOBA 17cbdDiYwVLgohxkzA4DvD7X034N+GBCgE/YNkfDxRFVfNK8JGJYjJGhbV9UCTwTuf jmvChVsQlAroQBOEHXq7yNYjCsowqW6pw5+dsnmL0xabElQCRQgg71h9OS6o8E/+Dr FQPUoox6/ZYeQ== Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 17:03:27 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: "Hill, Steven " Cc: "linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org" , Masahiro Yamada Subject: Re: [RFC] gcc-plugins patch for compiler versioning. Message-ID: <202509251701.0CC2424@keescook> References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 05:00:35PM +0000, Hill, Steven wrote: > Hello. > > Would like to have comments on the attached patch. There could be another > option for checking both gcc and glibc versions. Just wanted comments before > doing anything further. I am not on the mailing list, so please CC: on any > replies. Thank you. > > -Steve > > > From b1ac0805d70aaa2e1500a071f63c88bcaa76754e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: "Steven J. Hill" > Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2025 18:21:09 -0500 > Subject: [PATCH] gcc-plugins: Relax constraints on plugin compatibility. > > The compatibility check for gcc plugins is too inflexible, > and a lot of times wrong. Add ability to let the user choose > how stringent compatibility is. Why is it wrong a lot? I'm not sure I understand what problem is being solved here? -Kees -- Kees Cook