From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
patches@lists.linux.dev, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>, Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.15 057/554] compiler-gcc.h: Define __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ under hwaddress sanitizer
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 17:42:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260115164248.309136820@linuxfoundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260115164246.225995385@linuxfoundation.org>
5.15-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
[ Upstream commit 9a48e7564ac83fb0f1d5b0eac5fe8a7af62da398 ]
When Clang is using the hwaddress sanitizer, it sets __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__
explicitly:
#if __has_feature(address_sanitizer) || __has_feature(hwaddress_sanitizer)
/* Emulate GCC's __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ flag */
#define __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__
#endif
Once hwaddress sanitizer was added to GCC, however, a separate define
was created, __SANITIZE_HWADDRESS__. The kernel is expecting to find
__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ in either case, though, and the existing string
macros break on supported architectures:
#if (defined(CONFIG_KASAN_GENERIC) || defined(CONFIG_KASAN_SW_TAGS)) && \
!defined(__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__)
where as other architectures (like arm32) have no idea about hwaddress
sanitizer and just check for __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__:
#if defined(CONFIG_KASAN) && !defined(__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__)
This would lead to compiler foritfy self-test warnings when building
with CONFIG_KASAN_SW_TAGS=y:
warning: unsafe memmove() usage lacked '__read_overflow2' symbol in lib/test_fortify/read_overflow2-memmove.c
warning: unsafe memcpy() usage lacked '__write_overflow' symbol in lib/test_fortify/write_overflow-memcpy.c
...
Sort this out by also defining __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ in GCC under the
hwaddress sanitizer.
Suggested-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>
Cc: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>
Cc: llvm@lists.linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20211020200039.170424-1-keescook@chromium.org
Stable-dep-of: ced37e9ceae5 ("x86/dumpstack: Prevent KASAN false positive warnings in __show_regs()")
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
include/linux/compiler-gcc.h | 8 ++++++++
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h b/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h
index b9d5f9c373a09..06c1cf2ab0244 100644
--- a/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h
+++ b/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h
@@ -123,6 +123,14 @@
#define __no_sanitize_coverage
#endif
+/*
+ * Treat __SANITIZE_HWADDRESS__ the same as __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ in the kernel,
+ * matching the defines used by Clang.
+ */
+#ifdef __SANITIZE_HWADDRESS__
+#define __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__
+#endif
+
/*
* Turn individual warnings and errors on and off locally, depending
* on version.
--
2.51.0
parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-15 17:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
[parent not found: <20260115164246.225995385@linuxfoundation.org>]
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=20260115164248.309136820@linuxfoundation.org \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=nivedita@alum.mit.edu \
--cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
--cc=patches@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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