From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DB8CC43464 for ; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 22:18:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B644820874 for ; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 22:18:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="rue4/Giq"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="HbZxUoaq" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B644820874 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=chromium.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=uFC0Kp8o5/Ep5Aq3k0OXYcNVlhdE3KRLphKU7OYOfwI=; b=rue4/GiqjU+BmtflFzArhOBko BXNpA2kLeXxrtLE2Vqcy53ZA6VXPWyNmAHcQ/a4IOUg9xEXpg6PkLWv9XMRpCm3PSOPcNO1NyH8iY aDNFJxl9zPnXElPeR2GtFdGoWibdqrmQ3fQZbrviDKR3xcgqsFsy4FWhySEPAzdh0QRjBE+L2orAk DgnKMuDE5rLQ/+yyqQjMzLGO1cLxfVsnGp5MGlOpmvVf57CTES0OquBbYx9Ccb7awOr33l/5my5wN BqJiQnV8CRmqnpW+VM8sxXsYLbK6KFZrBedCujhwTj/t5BmcFsZ6Bei36Wye/7GF4htxYyI1X0s6O 3PKZAg3VA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kJ2DI-0002sb-R7; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 22:17:12 +0000 Received: from mail-pl1-x644.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::644]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kJ2DG-0002qt-2e for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 22:17:10 +0000 Received: by mail-pl1-x644.google.com with SMTP id e4so1863841pln.10 for ; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 15:17:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=15AUeIGCB8Co4ppPyHutmBPEoR96J0ZC+70DS6d6lEA=; b=HbZxUoaquDF7xsCL0N1nGOtEhjC6k/29ufocwCgKegfzTw+SnKB4PHA5efYOqvK5H8 qB29ehLrJeRvDiCO8wPb8MQdU7Q2icOOK5ZQA/+5FaVUaFbhQF8nbM1rBfgWZ4QUsvuy i0+a0YxbWmt8uHoYV7J6SZv0i7QqbjjxftLFM= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=15AUeIGCB8Co4ppPyHutmBPEoR96J0ZC+70DS6d6lEA=; b=gMaGbl2cy5yK4e80v/RUsFDGZDEFssQiuWcJEM4rSpLmEbu5bwRDJbarAgHbmnY4tl ANLkJJfV4t2L/cj79aLdjxF+UVrj9lOk1OxzCJFGua3SV9rEOzySkAf7ldZRtDkvQGjl QCDigIZzQYyQxbfNHNR8lesIXUGDpwfaMYjsqkOB6/rBw2gsULXz7+0iiA86xnaDiah2 SVhRutgYLotOeyErZBKIks1ou15BXZu6/2yVhjHhy3vbXhjBT9+TeRtP+Xf2uXLac+hE kdO5j+Oo2SWTogd8/yXFIsD9aOxIZ9QMROJGYwd43GLB4bzS7fwbEzl1AMmMLHdTQ5Yx mG2w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531+DzVuB2XLEyBUWJu0HBFgwe+k0DU6VieIf7UEpfQk46McqC2D IbtWkv3h1dZWhEbmsv09UGbSPw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxoOnxlx8CTv3DWk2KqkOMYm+QxpzLZyBZuGVpXsjrtygCBDQZLnqcz+qPsh63Ko+YuX/aNpA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:9343:b029:d1:f3e1:c190 with SMTP id g3-20020a1709029343b02900d1f3e1c190mr7793977plp.2.1600381026580; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 15:17:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h35sm626057pgl.31.2020.09.17.15.17.05 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 17 Sep 2020 15:17:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 15:17:04 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: George Popescu Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/14] Fix CFLAGS for UBSAN_BOUNDS on Clang Message-ID: <202009171516.6543C7649@keescook> References: <20200914172750.852684-1-georgepope@google.com> <20200914172750.852684-7-georgepope@google.com> <202009141509.CDDC8C8@keescook> <20200915102458.GA1650630@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200915102458.GA1650630@google.com> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200917_181710_153401_BB407F05 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 13.22 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, maskray@google.com, maz@kernel.org, masahiroy@kernel.org, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, dbrazdil@google.com, julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com, elver@google.com, arnd@arndb.de, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, broonie@kernel.org, ascull@google.com, natechancellor@gmail.com, dvyukov@google.com, michal.lkml@markovi.net, ndesaulniers@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 10:24:58AM +0000, George Popescu wrote: > This would mean losing the local-bounds coverage. I tried to test it without > local-bounds and with a locally defined array on the stack and it works fine > (the handler is called and the error reported). For me it feels like > --array-bounds and --local-bounds are triggered for the same type of > undefined_behaviours but they are handling them different. Er, if --array-bounds still works on local arrays, what does local-bounds actually do? >_> :P If we don't have a reduction in coverage, yeah, I'm fine to turn that off. -- Kees Cook _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel