[syzbot] [lsm?] WARNING in landlock_merge_ruleset

[syzbot] [lsm?] WARNING in landlock_merge_ruleset

[syzbot]

Hello,

syzbot found the following issue on:

HEAD commit:    aac26bee2287 Add linux-next specific files for 20261008
git tree:       linux-next
console+strace: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=1772f715580000
kernel config:  https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=814b0d31d59c294
dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=a0eecb22de4d821a9e5d
compiler:       Debian clang version 22.1.8 (++20260613092233+e80beda6e255-1~exp1~20260613092250.77), Debian LLD 22.1.8
syz repro:      https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.syz?x=1305c8e1580000
C reproducer:   https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.c?x=15497c3e580000

Downloadable assets:
disk image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/92e867ba9905/disk-aac26bee.raw.xz
vmlinux: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/c4cc176072c1/vmlinux-aac26bee.xz
kernel image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/c603638afe28/bzImage-aac26bee.xz

IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit:
Reported-by: syzbot+a0eecb22de4d821a9e5d@syzkaller.appspotmail.com

------------[ cut here ]------------
memcpy: detected buffer overflow: 16 byte read of buffer size 0
WARNING: lib/string_helpers.c:1037 at __fortify_report+0x6b/0xa0 lib/string_helpers.c:1036, CPU#0: syz-executor347/5624
Modules linked in:
CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 5624 Comm: syz-executor347 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) 
Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 09/16/2026
RIP: 0010:__fortify_report+0x89/0xa0 lib/string_helpers.c:1036
Code: e8 ec f1 4b fd 48 8d 3d c5 7e d7 0c 45 84 e4 49 8b 37 48 c7 c0 40 8d 8d 8c 48 c7 c1 60 8d 8d 8c 48 0f 44 c8 4c 89 f2 49 89 d8 <67> 48 0f b9 3a 5b 41 5c 41 5e 41 5f 5d e9 45 84 14 07 cc cc cc cc
RSP: 0018:ffffc90003bb7dc8 EFLAGS: 00010246
RAX: ffffffff8c8d8d40 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: ffffffff8c8d8d40
RDX: 0000000000000010 RSI: ffffffff8c8d8c20 RDI: ffffffff91c743f0
RBP: 000000000000000e R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 1ffff11006d9ed01
R10: dffffc0000000000 R11: ffffed1006d9ed02 R12: 0000000000000000
R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000010 R15: ffffffff8c8d8a78
FS:  000055558b41f400(0000) GS:ffff888123429000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
CR2: 000055c55f793000 CR3: 00000000359c2000 CR4: 00000000003526f0
Call Trace:
 <TASK>
 __fortify_panic+0x9/0x10 lib/string_helpers.c:1043
 fortify_memcpy_chk include/linux/fortify-string.h:547 [inline]
 inherit_ruleset security/landlock/domain.c:407 [inline]
 landlock_merge_ruleset+0xc46/0xc90 security/landlock/domain.c:468
 __do_sys_landlock_restrict_self security/landlock/syscalls.c:809 [inline]
 __se_sys_landlock_restrict_self+0x2bc/0xd40 security/landlock/syscalls.c:732
 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:61 [inline]
 do_syscall_64+0x166/0x520 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:84
 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
RIP: 0033:0x7fc0d85c8c39
Code: c0 79 93 eb d5 48 8d 7c 1d 00 eb 99 0f 1f 44 00 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 d8 ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48
RSP: 002b:00007fff6fcb7858 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 00000000000001be
RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007fff6fcb7988 RCX: 00007fc0d85c8c39
RDX: 00007fc0d85c8c39 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000004
RBP: 0000000000000001 R08: 00007fff6fcb7988 R09: 00007fff6fcb7988
R10: 00007fff6fcb7988 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 00007fff6fcb7978
R13: 0000000000000002 R14: 00007fc0d8659ca0 R15: 0000000000000002
 </TASK>
----------------
Code disassembly (best guess):
   0:	e8 ec f1 4b fd       	call   0xfd4bf1f1
   5:	48 8d 3d c5 7e d7 0c 	lea    0xcd77ec5(%rip),%rdi        # 0xcd77ed1
   c:	45 84 e4             	test   %r12b,%r12b
   f:	49 8b 37             	mov    (%r15),%rsi
  12:	48 c7 c0 40 8d 8d 8c 	mov    $0xffffffff8c8d8d40,%rax
  19:	48 c7 c1 60 8d 8d 8c 	mov    $0xffffffff8c8d8d60,%rcx
  20:	48 0f 44 c8          	cmove  %rax,%rcx
  24:	4c 89 f2             	mov    %r14,%rdx
  27:	49 89 d8             	mov    %rbx,%r8
* 2a:	67 48 0f b9 3a       	ud1    (%edx),%rdi <-- trapping instruction
  2f:	5b                   	pop    %rbx
  30:	41 5c                	pop    %r12
  32:	41 5e                	pop    %r14
  34:	41 5f                	pop    %r15
  36:	5d                   	pop    %rbp
  37:	e9 45 84 14 07       	jmp    0x7148481
  3c:	cc                   	int3
  3d:	cc                   	int3
  3e:	cc                   	int3
  3f:	cc                   	int3


---
This report is generated by a bot. It may contain errors.
See https://goo.gl/tpsmEJ for more information about syzbot.
syzbot engineers can be reached at syzkaller@googlegroups.com.

syzbot will keep track of this issue. See:
https://goo.gl/tpsmEJ#status for how to communicate with syzbot.

If the report is already addressed, let syzbot know by replying with:
#syz fix: exact-commit-title

If you want syzbot to run the reproducer, reply with:
#syz test: git://repo/address.git branch-or-commit-hash
If you attach or paste a git patch, syzbot will apply it before testing.

If you want to overwrite report's subsystems, reply with:
#syz set subsystems: new-subsystem
(See the list of subsystem names on the web dashboard)

If the report is a duplicate of another one, reply with:
#syz dup: exact-subject-of-another-report

If you want to undo deduplication, reply with:
#syz undup

[PATCH] landlock: Drop __counted_by from landlock_domain.layers

[Nguyen Ngoc Thang]

With clang 22 and CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE, the second
landlock_restrict_self() call hits a bogus fortify report in
inherit_ruleset():

  memcpy: detected buffer overflow: 16 byte read of buffer size 0
  Call Trace:
   __fortify_panic
   landlock_merge_ruleset+0xc46/0xc90
   __se_sys_landlock_restrict_self+0x2bc/0xd40

layers[] lives in an anonymous struct inside the anonymous union
that overlays work_free.  For such a flexible array, clang computes the
address of the __counted_by counter as the start of the array instead of
&num_layers.  The bound is then read from layers[0], i.e. from
the first layer's configuration, which is not a count.  The same layout
crashes clang itself in a standalone test.

The annotation was added as documentation, so drop it rather than
restructure the union.  Keep the information in the member comment.

Reported-by: syzbot+a0eecb22de4d821a9e5d@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=a0eecb22de4d821a9e5d
Fixes: bd3a19800dd1 ("landlock: Add counted_by in landlock_domain")
Signed-off-by: Nguyen Ngoc Thang <ngocthang2710.1999@gmail.com>
---
Reproduced with clang 22.1.8 and FORTIFY_SOURCE on mic/next (64b9e6eff524):
the second landlock_restrict_self() hits the report, while 16 nested
restricts run clean with this patch.  Mickaël, if you prefer to just drop
bd3a19800dd1 from next, that works as well.
 security/landlock/domain.h | 6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/security/landlock/domain.h b/security/landlock/domain.h
index 60e8eb2d6ac2..4bf1555a4349 100644
--- a/security/landlock/domain.h
+++ b/security/landlock/domain.h
@@ -246,8 +246,12 @@ struct landlock_domain {
 			 * properly handle merged rulesets without overlapping
 			 * access rights.  These layers are set once and never
 			 * changed for the lifetime of the domain.
+			 *
+			 * Not annotated with __counted_by(@num_layers): clang
+			 * miscomputes the counter address for a FAM nested in an
+			 * anonymous struct within a union, which trips FORTIFY.
 			 */
-			struct layer_config layers[] __counted_by(num_layers);
+			struct layer_config layers[];
 		};
 	};
 };
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [PATCH] landlock: Drop __counted_by from landlock_domain.layers

[Alejandro Colomar]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2747 bytes --]

Hello Nguyen,

> Date: 2026-10-10 23:44:49+0700
> From: Nguyen Ngoc Thang <ngocthang2710.1999@gmail.com>
>
> With clang 22 and CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE, the second
> landlock_restrict_self() call hits a bogus fortify report in
> inherit_ruleset():
> 
>   memcpy: detected buffer overflow: 16 byte read of buffer size 0
>   Call Trace:
>    __fortify_panic
>    landlock_merge_ruleset+0xc46/0xc90
>    __se_sys_landlock_restrict_self+0x2bc/0xd40
> 
> layers[] lives in an anonymous struct inside the anonymous union
> that overlays work_free.  For such a flexible array, clang computes the
> address of the __counted_by counter as the start of the array instead of
> &num_layers.  The bound is then read from layers[0], i.e. from
> the first layer's configuration, which is not a count.  The same layout
> crashes clang itself in a standalone test.
> 
> The annotation was added as documentation, so drop it rather than
> restructure the union.  Keep the information in the member comment.
> 
> Reported-by: syzbot+a0eecb22de4d821a9e5d@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=a0eecb22de4d821a9e5d
> Fixes: bd3a19800dd1 ("landlock: Add counted_by in landlock_domain")
> Signed-off-by: Nguyen Ngoc Thang <ngocthang2710.1999@gmail.com>
> ---
> Reproduced with clang 22.1.8 and FORTIFY_SOURCE on mic/next (64b9e6eff524):
> the second landlock_restrict_self() hits the report, while 16 nested
> restricts run clean with this patch.  Mickaël, if you prefer to just drop
> bd3a19800dd1 from next, that works as well.

Is this reproducible with Clang 23 or later?

Should __counted_by() expand to nothing for bogus versions of Clang?
That would allow using it, and just ignore Clang when it's broken,
rather than not using safety features.


Have a lovely day!
Alex

>  security/landlock/domain.h | 6 +++++-
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/security/landlock/domain.h b/security/landlock/domain.h
> index 60e8eb2d6ac2..4bf1555a4349 100644
> --- a/security/landlock/domain.h
> +++ b/security/landlock/domain.h
> @@ -246,8 +246,12 @@ struct landlock_domain {
>  			 * properly handle merged rulesets without overlapping
>  			 * access rights.  These layers are set once and never
>  			 * changed for the lifetime of the domain.
> +			 *
> +			 * Not annotated with __counted_by(@num_layers): clang
> +			 * miscomputes the counter address for a FAM nested in an
> +			 * anonymous struct within a union, which trips FORTIFY.
>  			 */
> -			struct layer_config layers[] __counted_by(num_layers);
> +			struct layer_config layers[];
>  		};
>  	};
>  };
> -- 
> 2.43.0
> 
> 

-- 
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es>

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] landlock: Drop __counted_by from landlock_domain.layers

[Nathan Chancellor]

On Sat, Oct 10, 2026 at 08:05:48PM +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> Hello Nguyen,
> 
> > Date: 2026-10-10 23:44:49+0700
> > From: Nguyen Ngoc Thang <ngocthang2710.1999@gmail.com>
> >
> > With clang 22 and CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE, the second
> > landlock_restrict_self() call hits a bogus fortify report in
> > inherit_ruleset():
> > 
> >   memcpy: detected buffer overflow: 16 byte read of buffer size 0
> >   Call Trace:
> >    __fortify_panic
> >    landlock_merge_ruleset+0xc46/0xc90
> >    __se_sys_landlock_restrict_self+0x2bc/0xd40
> > 
> > layers[] lives in an anonymous struct inside the anonymous union
> > that overlays work_free.  For such a flexible array, clang computes the
> > address of the __counted_by counter as the start of the array instead of
> > &num_layers.  The bound is then read from layers[0], i.e. from
> > the first layer's configuration, which is not a count.  The same layout
> > crashes clang itself in a standalone test.
> > 
> > The annotation was added as documentation, so drop it rather than
> > restructure the union.  Keep the information in the member comment.
> > 
> > Reported-by: syzbot+a0eecb22de4d821a9e5d@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> > Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=a0eecb22de4d821a9e5d
> > Fixes: bd3a19800dd1 ("landlock: Add counted_by in landlock_domain")
> > Signed-off-by: Nguyen Ngoc Thang <ngocthang2710.1999@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > Reproduced with clang 22.1.8 and FORTIFY_SOURCE on mic/next (64b9e6eff524):
> > the second landlock_restrict_self() hits the report, while 16 nested
> > restricts run clean with this patch.  Mickaël, if you prefer to just drop
> > bd3a19800dd1 from next, that works as well.
> 
> Is this reproducible with Clang 23 or later?
> 
> Should __counted_by() expand to nothing for bogus versions of Clang?
> That would allow using it, and just ignore Clang when it's broken,
> rather than not using safety features.

This is actively being discussed/investigated in another thread but yes,
we will be marking clang versions affected by this problem as broken for
__counted_by:

  https://lore.kernel.org/20261007-b4-landlock-fix-domain-fortify-panic-v1-1-042e9108f5f8@oss.qualcomm.com/

> >  security/landlock/domain.h | 6 +++++-
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/security/landlock/domain.h b/security/landlock/domain.h
> > index 60e8eb2d6ac2..4bf1555a4349 100644
> > --- a/security/landlock/domain.h
> > +++ b/security/landlock/domain.h
> > @@ -246,8 +246,12 @@ struct landlock_domain {
> >  			 * properly handle merged rulesets without overlapping
> >  			 * access rights.  These layers are set once and never
> >  			 * changed for the lifetime of the domain.
> > +			 *
> > +			 * Not annotated with __counted_by(@num_layers): clang
> > +			 * miscomputes the counter address for a FAM nested in an
> > +			 * anonymous struct within a union, which trips FORTIFY.
> >  			 */
> > -			struct layer_config layers[] __counted_by(num_layers);
> > +			struct layer_config layers[];
> >  		};
> >  	};
> >  };
> > -- 
> > 2.43.0
> > 
> > 
> 
> -- 
> <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es>



-- 
Cheers,
Nathan

Re: [PATCH] landlock: Drop __counted_by from landlock_domain.layers

[Nguyen Ngoc Thang]

Hi Nathan, Alex,

Thanks for the pointers. I wasn't aware of the earlier thread, so please
disregard my patch in favor of the one from Qualcomm and the Clang
version gating of __counted_by.

To answer Alex's question: I only tested with Clang 22.1.8 (Debian
22.1.8-1~deb13u4, same as the syzbot build). I did not try Clang 23 or
later, so I can't say whether it is fixed there.

Thanks,
Nguyen

Re: [PATCH] landlock: Drop __counted_by from landlock_domain.layers

[Günther Noack]

On Sat, Oct 10, 2026 at 11:44:49PM +0700, Nguyen Ngoc Thang wrote:
> With clang 22 and CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE, the second
> landlock_restrict_self() call hits a bogus fortify report in
> inherit_ruleset():
> 
>   memcpy: detected buffer overflow: 16 byte read of buffer size 0
>   Call Trace:
>    __fortify_panic
>    landlock_merge_ruleset+0xc46/0xc90
>    __se_sys_landlock_restrict_self+0x2bc/0xd40
> 
> layers[] lives in an anonymous struct inside the anonymous union
> that overlays work_free.  For such a flexible array, clang computes the
> address of the __counted_by counter as the start of the array instead of
> &num_layers.  The bound is then read from layers[0], i.e. from
> the first layer's configuration, which is not a count.  The same layout
> crashes clang itself in a standalone test.
> 
> The annotation was added as documentation, so drop it rather than
> restructure the union.  Keep the information in the member comment.
> 
> Reported-by: syzbot+a0eecb22de4d821a9e5d@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=a0eecb22de4d821a9e5d
> Fixes: bd3a19800dd1 ("landlock: Add counted_by in landlock_domain")
> Signed-off-by: Nguyen Ngoc Thang <ngocthang2710.1999@gmail.com>
> ---
> Reproduced with clang 22.1.8 and FORTIFY_SOURCE on mic/next (64b9e6eff524):
> the second landlock_restrict_self() hits the report, while 16 nested
> restricts run clean with this patch.  Mickaël, if you prefer to just drop
> bd3a19800dd1 from next, that works as well.
>  security/landlock/domain.h | 6 +++++-
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/security/landlock/domain.h b/security/landlock/domain.h
> index 60e8eb2d6ac2..4bf1555a4349 100644
> --- a/security/landlock/domain.h
> +++ b/security/landlock/domain.h
> @@ -246,8 +246,12 @@ struct landlock_domain {
>  			 * properly handle merged rulesets without overlapping
>  			 * access rights.  These layers are set once and never
>  			 * changed for the lifetime of the domain.
> +			 *
> +			 * Not annotated with __counted_by(@num_layers): clang
> +			 * miscomputes the counter address for a FAM nested in an
> +			 * anonymous struct within a union, which trips FORTIFY.
>  			 */
> -			struct layer_config layers[] __counted_by(num_layers);
> +			struct layer_config layers[];
>  		};
>  	};
>  };
> -- 
> 2.43.0
> 

Reviewed-by: Günther Noack <gnoack3000@gmail.com>

I agree - it seems better to drop the __counted_by rather than
restructuring the entire struct for that.

Thanks also for adding a comment about it.  The __counted_by() has
only been added very recently in September, in commit bd3a19800dd1
("landlock: Add counted_by in landlock_domain").  Better to have a
note about it so that we don't accidentally add it back. :)

–Günther

Re: [PATCH] landlock: Drop __counted_by from landlock_domain.layers

[Mickaël Salaün]

On Sun, Oct 11, 2026 at 03:11:12PM +0200, Günther Noack wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 10, 2026 at 11:44:49PM +0700, Nguyen Ngoc Thang wrote:
> > With clang 22 and CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE, the second
> > landlock_restrict_self() call hits a bogus fortify report in
> > inherit_ruleset():
> > 
> >   memcpy: detected buffer overflow: 16 byte read of buffer size 0
> >   Call Trace:
> >    __fortify_panic
> >    landlock_merge_ruleset+0xc46/0xc90
> >    __se_sys_landlock_restrict_self+0x2bc/0xd40
> > 
> > layers[] lives in an anonymous struct inside the anonymous union
> > that overlays work_free.  For such a flexible array, clang computes the
> > address of the __counted_by counter as the start of the array instead of
> > &num_layers.  The bound is then read from layers[0], i.e. from
> > the first layer's configuration, which is not a count.  The same layout
> > crashes clang itself in a standalone test.
> > 
> > The annotation was added as documentation, so drop it rather than
> > restructure the union.  Keep the information in the member comment.
> > 
> > Reported-by: syzbot+a0eecb22de4d821a9e5d@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> > Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=a0eecb22de4d821a9e5d
> > Fixes: bd3a19800dd1 ("landlock: Add counted_by in landlock_domain")
> > Signed-off-by: Nguyen Ngoc Thang <ngocthang2710.1999@gmail.com>

Thanks for the patch.

> > ---
> > Reproduced with clang 22.1.8 and FORTIFY_SOURCE on mic/next (64b9e6eff524):
> > the second landlock_restrict_self() hits the report, while 16 nested
> > restricts run clean with this patch.  Mickaël, if you prefer to just drop
> > bd3a19800dd1 from next, that works as well.
> >  security/landlock/domain.h | 6 +++++-
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/security/landlock/domain.h b/security/landlock/domain.h
> > index 60e8eb2d6ac2..4bf1555a4349 100644
> > --- a/security/landlock/domain.h
> > +++ b/security/landlock/domain.h
> > @@ -246,8 +246,12 @@ struct landlock_domain {
> >  			 * properly handle merged rulesets without overlapping
> >  			 * access rights.  These layers are set once and never
> >  			 * changed for the lifetime of the domain.
> > +			 *
> > +			 * Not annotated with __counted_by(@num_layers): clang
> > +			 * miscomputes the counter address for a FAM nested in an
> > +			 * anonymous struct within a union, which trips FORTIFY.
> >  			 */
> > -			struct layer_config layers[] __counted_by(num_layers);
> > +			struct layer_config layers[];
> >  		};
> >  	};
> >  };
> > -- 
> > 2.43.0
> > 
> 
> Reviewed-by: Günther Noack <gnoack3000@gmail.com>
> 
> I agree - it seems better to drop the __counted_by rather than
> restructuring the entire struct for that.
> 
> Thanks also for adding a comment about it.  The __counted_by() has
> only been added very recently in September, in commit bd3a19800dd1
> ("landlock: Add counted_by in landlock_domain").  Better to have a
> note about it so that we don't accidentally add it back. :)

Actually, I independently wrote a quite similar patch (while traveling),
but it applies to v7.3-rc5 instead of mic/next.  I removed the patch
series that I applied on mic/next because it conflicts with my patch and
I need to send a new version anyway.  If you don't mind, I'll keep
Günther's Reviewed-by tag and credit other contributors in my patch.
I'll propose it for v7.3-rc7 (today) because it is trivial and will help
new patches on top of that.

Re: [PATCH] landlock: Drop __counted_by from landlock_domain.layers

[Nguyen Ngoc Thang]

Hi Mickaël, Günther,

Sounds good, no problem at all. Thanks for the quick review, and
happy for you to take your version for v7.3-rc7.

Thanks,
Thang

Re: [PATCH] landlock: Drop __counted_by from landlock_domain.layers

[Mickaël Salaün]

On Sun, Oct 11, 2026 at 04:32:05PM +0200, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2026 at 03:11:12PM +0200, Günther Noack wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 10, 2026 at 11:44:49PM +0700, Nguyen Ngoc Thang wrote:
> > > With clang 22 and CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE, the second
> > > landlock_restrict_self() call hits a bogus fortify report in
> > > inherit_ruleset():
> > > 
> > >   memcpy: detected buffer overflow: 16 byte read of buffer size 0
> > >   Call Trace:
> > >    __fortify_panic
> > >    landlock_merge_ruleset+0xc46/0xc90
> > >    __se_sys_landlock_restrict_self+0x2bc/0xd40
> > > 
> > > layers[] lives in an anonymous struct inside the anonymous union
> > > that overlays work_free.  For such a flexible array, clang computes the
> > > address of the __counted_by counter as the start of the array instead of
> > > &num_layers.  The bound is then read from layers[0], i.e. from
> > > the first layer's configuration, which is not a count.  The same layout
> > > crashes clang itself in a standalone test.
> > > 
> > > The annotation was added as documentation, so drop it rather than
> > > restructure the union.  Keep the information in the member comment.
> > > 
> > > Reported-by: syzbot+a0eecb22de4d821a9e5d@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> > > Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=a0eecb22de4d821a9e5d
> > > Fixes: bd3a19800dd1 ("landlock: Add counted_by in landlock_domain")
> > > Signed-off-by: Nguyen Ngoc Thang <ngocthang2710.1999@gmail.com>
> 
> Thanks for the patch.
> 
> > > ---
> > > Reproduced with clang 22.1.8 and FORTIFY_SOURCE on mic/next (64b9e6eff524):
> > > the second landlock_restrict_self() hits the report, while 16 nested
> > > restricts run clean with this patch.  Mickaël, if you prefer to just drop
> > > bd3a19800dd1 from next, that works as well.
> > >  security/landlock/domain.h | 6 +++++-
> > >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/security/landlock/domain.h b/security/landlock/domain.h
> > > index 60e8eb2d6ac2..4bf1555a4349 100644
> > > --- a/security/landlock/domain.h
> > > +++ b/security/landlock/domain.h
> > > @@ -246,8 +246,12 @@ struct landlock_domain {
> > >  			 * properly handle merged rulesets without overlapping
> > >  			 * access rights.  These layers are set once and never
> > >  			 * changed for the lifetime of the domain.
> > > +			 *
> > > +			 * Not annotated with __counted_by(@num_layers): clang
> > > +			 * miscomputes the counter address for a FAM nested in an
> > > +			 * anonymous struct within a union, which trips FORTIFY.
> > >  			 */
> > > -			struct layer_config layers[] __counted_by(num_layers);
> > > +			struct layer_config layers[];
> > >  		};
> > >  	};
> > >  };
> > > -- 
> > > 2.43.0
> > > 
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Günther Noack <gnoack3000@gmail.com>
> > 
> > I agree - it seems better to drop the __counted_by rather than
> > restructuring the entire struct for that.
> > 
> > Thanks also for adding a comment about it.  The __counted_by() has
> > only been added very recently in September, in commit bd3a19800dd1
> > ("landlock: Add counted_by in landlock_domain").  Better to have a
> > note about it so that we don't accidentally add it back. :)
> 
> Actually, I independently wrote a quite similar patch (while traveling),
> but it applies to v7.3-rc5 instead of mic/next.  I removed the patch
> series that I applied on mic/next because it conflicts with my patch and
> I need to send a new version anyway.  If you don't mind, I'll keep
> Günther's Reviewed-by tag and credit other contributors in my patch.
> I'll propose it for v7.3-rc7 (today) because it is trivial and will help
> new patches on top of that.

Here is my rebase:
https://git.kernel.org/mic/c/3d8cc52db2f86b624308321c58513019f6b21eec