From: Ingo Saitz <ingo@hannover.ccc.de>
To: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
Cc: "Ingo Saitz" <ingo@hannover.ccc.de>,
"Valdis Klētnieks" <valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu>,
linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Build error in next-20260223 gcc-plugins/latent_entropy_plugin.so
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2026 13:25:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ab6OKoay0OWkywjK@spatz.zoo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202603201220.8E538CC1@keescook>
On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 12:23:10PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> Thanks for this!
>
> Should CONST_CAST_TREE be explicitly defined instead, to match
> CONST_CAST_GIMPLE in the this header file? It seems weird to have one of
> two done this way: we should either do both or neither (CONST_CAST_GIMPLE
> is only used in the header file too).
My first idea was to simplay guard this depending on the gcc version,
since the CONST_CAST_TREE type changed from (union tree_node *) to tree.
But the typedef union tree_node *tree (in gcc source: gcc/coretypes.h)
is already there in gcc-8, and const_cast is an old c++ feature.
> Is const_cast<gimple> and const_cast<tree> valid back through GCC 8
> (earliest Linux-supported GCC)?
I successfully compiled and booted linux 6.19.8 with my patch applied
with gcc-8 (Debian 8.3.0-7) 8.3.0, so it think this patch does work with
all supported gcc versions and a guard is not needed indeed.
I tried to minimize the changes, since I don't really know how gcc
plugins actually work. But changing CONST_CAST_GIMPLE to
const_cast<gimple>, too, should not fail since that's now a simple text
replacement.
Ingo
--
const_cast<long double>(Λ)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-21 12:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-25 5:20 Build error in next-20260223 gcc-plugins/latent_entropy_plugin.so Valdis Klētnieks
2026-02-25 7:33 ` Kees Cook
2026-02-25 15:14 ` Valdis Klētnieks
2026-03-14 13:50 ` Ingo Saitz
2026-03-14 14:44 ` Ingo Saitz
2026-03-20 19:23 ` Kees Cook
2026-03-21 12:25 ` Ingo Saitz [this message]
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=ab6OKoay0OWkywjK@spatz.zoo \
--to=ingo@hannover.ccc.de \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu \
/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.