lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [lkp-robot] [x86/asm] 51bad67ffb: int3:#[##]

* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 3:43 PM Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > Glancing through the 32-bit and 64-bit entry code, I didn't see any more
> > cases. At least it will fail loudly if any such cases do still exist.
>
> \Will it? Do we have objtool checks for it now?
>
> Because without static checks, there could be things hiding that just don't
> happen normally (think compat code etc that for most people is just dead
> code).

And it's not just about infrequent uses, it's also about hard to debug crashes
like in suspend/resume code, where people can only report "machine is dead".

So I'm not sure this side effect of turning padding into crashes is good for
overall robustness, without static analysis finding such bugs.

Thanks,

Ingo

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-05-18 09:16    [W:0.082 / U:5.484 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site