[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFytWtipkgGtkZgzRTQqLPxG+QzJ2K9+oFdo9NVNXxB69g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2017 09:31:34 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Patrick McLean <chutzpah@...too.org>, Emese Revfy <re.emese@...il.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Bruce Fields <bfields@...hat.com>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>, stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@...mhuis.info>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [nfsd4] potentially hardware breaking regression in 4.14-rc and 4.13.11
Boris Lukashev points out that Patrick should probably check a newer
version of gcc.
I looked around, and in one of the emails, Patrick said:
"No changes, both the working and broken kernels were built with
distro-provided gcc 5.4.0 and binutils 2.28.1"
and gcc-5.4.0 is certainly not very recent. It's not _ancient_, but
it's a bug-fix release to a pretty old branch that is not exactly new.
It would probably be good to check if the problems persist with gcc
6.x or 7.x.. I have no idea which gcc version the randstruct people
tend to use themselves.
Linus
On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 8:13 AM, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> I'll take a closer look at this and see if I can provide something to
> narrow it down.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
