From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-b7-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-b7-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.158]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C63151C330C; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 17:01:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.158 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729530100; cv=none; b=umxL/qsppxN59ayZd0akUNRkCTjTW69Whaw/n3OOJ65zf/o25llR5J2FCAY3LnuVfJv6o/6dHIq5XEjel7LbujY19dZcJgSImZFufkws0tkYTebtp8thMZ4miBsUBClX/ziw7iGjhYKITTtY/kHjFHpEorsiApS2SwlULeynCws= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729530100; c=relaxed/simple; bh=EdrW4QyQlhTewuPVfOLFcxOIGlObb6XfUuBmUv9yjPI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=spNbk9bKoraGFDyH3wf48fAyl6xtulL/5kZZ0eicXraU74FTkzxTjOyY/THK2d4jUwYYNZSjlDobUn/NKJ2+1/J9PnAwpywnw2vzTWXwT/O15+e3HORcj5soLGClfV/LEuFE5kKO8jDaWoqnwYnk424l4kH7BqAIubOA89RbKGg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=jfarr.cc; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=jfarr.cc; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=jfarr.cc header.i=@jfarr.cc header.b=kA3gMl4h; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=MTLizXYG; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.158 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=jfarr.cc Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=jfarr.cc Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=jfarr.cc header.i=@jfarr.cc header.b="kA3gMl4h"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="MTLizXYG" Received: from phl-compute-11.internal (phl-compute-11.phl.internal [10.202.2.51]) by mailfhigh.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92B6E25400DF; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 13:01:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-mailfrontend-01 ([10.202.2.162]) by phl-compute-11.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 21 Oct 2024 13:01:37 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jfarr.cc; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1729530097; x=1729616497; bh=0Cp/HfzuQ/ MdndVSy8g4lWxf16i11f2fUzT7z2EWKY0=; b=kA3gMl4hNlwQUJBN0El7vPwZmb tHNQEyh8XFScbu4/dKOAZKsJ/znUd5g9YaXVDJ08hZVXzUGeOEVhSgvVvPculIvZ 9Hob6qPNMq2H50lkS6IukZQ/Yp7kOZGJKkQKl8d0b+yhfFeFkS/zXfVZst/jftLW aAwlJd0LaXSA4xAYv3KZiMmo4SM+8FZ7/cfEiawfR4Yn//PWYki31yGhF2LvxNmQ JwFCImqTX5sXW7MOQnggjH6fKf6v0A+R83Qt38yFyUwI7ai2StkrpZjOiFixDih2 fFfFt5k7OJKx9D3L+zDMIfiJcFhTQwWzX8d6hgPZzqj0cDZNKAOx4KfbPmdA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm3; t=1729530097; x=1729616497; bh=0Cp/HfzuQ/MdndVSy8g4lWxf16i1 1f2fUzT7z2EWKY0=; b=MTLizXYGUWuhuuU/jMFO7jL8+HFW3oNzCoLcTiFeeQIu 0PszXAa2/JI8o+npKACIgFtw2ErBC8xFGVO4qpBouQGZdXZv8aFfPpDqlcqza0kp 0NZPm4ey035NyASqfy6irrhn10R25ABcd94JGPdIlSMHsuGU8IKRR0ow6Id7ZCoJ D/Zm4L6SfLPwVsMABITYKYXGQazU4z6dEK+SAG/wHpDPI8m7sttTLM6M9ZPp/nkt T59c7TaZus8kwn61EUQpVVSmC2h2E99vYH40+i8C4wBZTYJERvnk2+eVtZ/Ey28A GhdYGNKX3AdEkGHOweFCZPnCHHqULOCRar6pujWLRA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeftddrvdehledguddtkecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpggftfghnshhusghstghrihgsvgdp uffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivg hnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenfghrlhcuvffnffculdeftddmnecujfgurhepfffhvfevuffk fhggtggujgesthdtredttddtvdenucfhrhhomheplfgrnhcujfgvnhgurhhikhcuhfgrrh hruceokhgvrhhnvghlsehjfhgrrhhrrdgttgeqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepudekgeff tdefiefhheetvedvieeuteetlefgfedvhfelueefgeeiudeiudfhkeeinecuvehluhhsth gvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepkhgvrhhnvghlsehjfhgr rhhrrdgttgdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohepuddvpdhmohguvgepshhmthhpohhuthdprhgtph htthhopehmihhguhgvlhdrohhjvggurgdrshgrnhguohhnihhssehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhm pdhrtghpthhtohepnhgrthhhrghnsehkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopehmoh hrsghosehgohhoghhlvgdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehkvggvsheskhgvrhhnvghlrdho rhhgpdhrtghpthhtohepthhhohhrshhtvghnrdgslhhumhesthhosghluhigrdgtohhmpd hrtghpthhtohepkhgvnhhtrdhovhgvrhhsthhrvggvtheslhhinhhugidruggvvhdprhgt phhtthhopehrvghgrhgvshhsihhonhhssehlihhsthhsrdhlihhnuhigrdguvghvpdhrtg hpthhtoheplhhinhhugidqsggtrggthhgvfhhssehvghgvrhdrkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhg pdhrtghpthhtoheplhhinhhugidqhhgrrhguvghnihhnghesvhhgvghrrdhkvghrnhgvlh drohhrgh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i01d149f8:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 13:01:35 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 19:01:32 +0200 From: Jan Hendrik Farr To: Miguel Ojeda Cc: Nathan Chancellor , Bill Wendling , Kees Cook , Thorsten Blum , kent.overstreet@linux.dev, regressions@lists.linux.dev, linux-bcachefs@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ardb@kernel.org, ojeda@kernel.org Subject: Re: [REGRESSION][BISECTED] erroneous buffer overflow detected in bch2_xattr_validate Message-ID: References: <202410031424.45E5D19@keescook> <202410040958.C19D3B9E48@keescook> <20241017165522.GA370674@thelio-3990X> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On 21 08:04:03, Miguel Ojeda wrote: > > Also after gcc 15 is released I don't think a version check for gcc > > should be necessary. I only see an explicit version check as required > > when we know a certain version is broken. Otherwise I would prefer using > > the build test. > > Yeah, build tests are nice, although they require spawning a process > and so on, which (as far as I understand) we try to minimize. Version > checks also have the advantage that it is easy to remember/check when > we can remove the checks themselves when we upgrade the minimum > versions. > If the goal is to minimize the need for build tests, I think we should go with Nathan's suggestion of keeping the build test for now (to support pre-release gcc versions) and remove it and just go with versions checks for both gcc and clang once gcc 15 is released. Best Regards Jan