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=-11.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham 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 ECA8CC4338F for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 01:59:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C178061101 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 01:59:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235667AbhHYCAR (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Aug 2021 22:00:17 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38338 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234840AbhHYCAR (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Aug 2021 22:00:17 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-x52e.google.com (mail-pg1-x52e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66E67C061764 for ; Tue, 24 Aug 2021 18:59:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x52e.google.com with SMTP id q68so4487120pga.9 for ; Tue, 24 Aug 2021 18:59:32 -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=XsgT98Ef1PFv4QYUD3OhXp4FkD4LKke0u8lQs/ffn8Q=; b=DcDV8C8M3T2uUhg8nOJpVsUxw+cJcIjseorOM1zBj41KvGzri0N2++qgnw6tDho5F2 m7+ij+2L1gJCgnBm5mi44PjcJkNlq0OWott45dddW5hL9WVyZfaVxSowcxlEYqvxk2qn wa4IwawFk2HIAUZW5ELhDCIzPMp6Z3mG9cXbI= 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=XsgT98Ef1PFv4QYUD3OhXp4FkD4LKke0u8lQs/ffn8Q=; b=WzFCFv+oHB4eh8DXcehfln/T2kTyh7wVWpS4MR6jcQBsEYbZzWJGBhVU4xuk6zU6se 8iKwLb2vwPjo9ifYWjJUSJdrhQq1rI+V1yTthoFnXwHzm3q7rdwJyGDNTXMrpEnGOmKH 3y1IrbGNhZMjKz2jfilZcQMOczNkyVxLNbmBlPP9IKDzuJswfX1A+T1cW8OkHD6j41Cn gm4dOt5CpCClMUWukMqpCcPDXO0ALLJLyeGUxDB/dtQ/Bl7vnitwWDL7d5rkzewRQTj9 cxV1DBITBsBFBv4P6Tp/2cpLPYP7Jb07gM75bFurJ6ZoO8Ue9XtfY0zLpo7Aek5TXgfN kulQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530M5W9KRjlPG1g76EPimWLIY6oB6yGwR5zB4BU/1YH5YImVAcnk U78J5EEm3y4FFZcawpRUpEBhIQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxOeAVwClgTWACcAF9l0rUSeBXNU4Dxyecx84D2J9hQuBfaO7kafkVhde3oIo4ITr5kHqGg2w== X-Received: by 2002:a65:690c:: with SMTP id s12mr39938967pgq.401.1629856771855; Tue, 24 Aug 2021 18:59:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 20sm20893700pfi.170.2021.08.24.18.59.30 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 24 Aug 2021 18:59:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2021 18:59:30 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Randy Dunlap , Andrew Morton , Linux Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Nathan Chancellor Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Aug 20 (Wno-alloc-size-larger-than) Message-ID: <202108241858.63C1FBC1@keescook> References: <20210820192615.23e2e617@canb.auug.org.au> <2706a406-9f72-7df1-03f6-f8e852897eb2@infradead.org> <202108202248.921E8C66@keescook> <8b9cb816-9d8a-2633-1afa-f5c4597a8314@infradead.org> <20210823203742.5169ad54@canb.auug.org.au> <66615de5-4acb-8d85-6d69-ddd0b9609348@infradead.org> <20210824115859.187f272f@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210824115859.187f272f@canb.auug.org.au> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 11:58:59AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Randy, > > On Mon, 23 Aug 2021 18:24:44 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote: > > > > This is just weird. What I am seeing is that for every source file > > where gcc emits a warning: it then follows that up with this > > >> cc1: warning: unrecognized command line option '-Wno-alloc-size-larger-than' > > I see the same, as well as: > > :1515:2: warning: #warning syscall clone3 not implemented [-Wcpp] > cc1: warning: unrecognized command line option '-Wno-alloc-size-larger-than' > > But only on my gcc 7.3.1 builds (the rest are gcc 10). > > > Smells like a gcc bug to me. > > Yes > > Also noted here: https://github.com/DynamoRIO/drmemory/issues/2099 (second comment) Wow, this is really weird. Okay, thanks for the pointers. I'll keep investigating. I may need to version-limit the use of __alloc_size, though I'd rather not. We've been able to depend on has_builtin() nicely for a while now. :P -- Kees Cook