From: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
To: "Thomas Weißschuh" <linux@weissschuh.net>
Cc: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
Nicolas Schier <nicolas@fjasle.eu>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org,
David Gow <davidgow@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kbuild: clang: Support building UM with SUBARCH=i386
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2025 09:07:57 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202503040842.1177A1F15B@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e1a1531d-6968-4ae8-a3b5-5ea0547ec4b3@t-8ch.de>
On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 03:51:19PM +0100, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> On 2025-03-04 11:25:36+0100, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 11:29:58PM +0100, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > > On 2025-03-03 13:52:41-0800, Kees Cook wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > > This is also what exists in tools/testing/selftests/lib.mk.
> > > Minus the missing CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE on clang x86_32
> > > and a failure of overflow.DEFINE_FLEX_test (clang 19.1.7).
> >
> > Does Kees's other patch resolve the second issue? It'll obviously fix
> > the first :P
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/20250303214929.work.499-kees@kernel.org/
>
> No, it doesn't.
>
> Running tests with:
> $ .kunit/linux kunit.filter_glob=overflow.DEFINE_FLEX_test kunit.enable=1 mem=1G console=tty kunit_shutdown=halt
> [15:48:30] =================== overflow (1 subtest) ===================
> [15:48:30] # DEFINE_FLEX_test: EXPECTATION FAILED at lib/overflow_kunit.c:1200
> [15:48:30] Expected __builtin_dynamic_object_size(two_but_zero, 0) == expected_raw_size, but
> [15:48:30] __builtin_dynamic_object_size(two_but_zero, 0) == 12 (0xc)
> [15:48:30] expected_raw_size == 8 (0x8)
> [15:48:30] [FAILED] DEFINE_FLEX_test
> [15:48:30] # module: overflow_kunit
> [15:48:30] ==================== [FAILED] overflow =====================
> [15:48:30] ============================================================
> [15:48:30] Testing complete. Ran 1 tests: failed: 1
> [15:48:31] Elapsed time: 43.985s total, 0.001s configuring, 43.818s building, 0.133s running
>
> If I force CONFIG_CC_HAS_COUNTED_BY=n then the test succeeds.
> Clang 19.1.7 from the Arch Linux repos.
I wasn't seeing with Clang 20 from git:
ClangBuiltLinux clang version 20.0.0git (git@github.com:llvm/llvm-project.git 72901fe19eb1e55d0ee1c380ab7a9f57d2f187c5)
But I do see the error with ToT Clang:
ClangBuiltLinux clang version 21.0.0git (git@github.com:llvm/llvm-project.git eee3db5421040cfc3eae6e92ed714650a6f741fa)
Clang 17.1: (does not support counted_by)
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: missing counted_by
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: sizeof(two_but_zero): 8
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: __struct_size(two_but_zero): 12
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: __member_size(two_but_zero): 12
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: __member_size(two_but_zero->array): 4
Clang 19.1.1: (actually is _does_ support counted_by, but Linux disables it)
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: missing counted_by
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: sizeof(two_but_zero): 8
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: __struct_size(two_but_zero): 12
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: __member_size(two_but_zero): 12
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: __member_size(two_but_zero->array): 4
GCC 13.3:
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: missing counted_by
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: sizeof(two_but_zero): 8
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: __struct_size(two_but_zero): 12
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: __member_size(two_but_zero): 12
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: __member_size(two_but_zero->array): 4
Clang 21 (ToT):
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: has counted_by
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: sizeof(two_but_zero): 8
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: __struct_size(two_but_zero): 12
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: __member_size(two_but_zero): 12
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: __member_size(two_but_zero->array): 0
GCC 15 (ToT):
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: has counted_by
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: sizeof(two_but_zero): 8
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: __struct_size(two_but_zero): 12
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: __member_size(two_but_zero): 12
# DEFINE_FLEX_test: __member_size(two_but_zero->array): 0
It seems like the on-stack sizes with __bdos all agree now, regardless
of the used compiler features. It is only the array size calculation
that now gets masked by counted_by. (i.e. the stack size is overridden
by the zero "count" for the array elements.)
I'll send a fix for the test...
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-04 17:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-03 21:52 [PATCH] kbuild: clang: Support building UM with SUBARCH=i386 Kees Cook
2025-03-03 22:29 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-03-04 10:25 ` Nathan Chancellor
2025-03-04 14:51 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-03-04 17:07 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2025-03-05 14:45 ` Nathan Chancellor
2025-03-06 6:12 ` Kees Cook
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=202503040842.1177A1F15B@keescook \
--to=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=davidgow@google.com \
--cc=justinstitt@google.com \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@weissschuh.net \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
--cc=morbo@google.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=nicolas@fjasle.eu \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox