Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 16:55:37 -0800 From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> To: Patrick McLean <chutzpah@...too.org> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.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 On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Patrick McLean <chutzpah@...too.org> wrote: > > I am still getting the crash at d9e12200852d, I figured I would > double-check the "good" and "bad" kernels before starting a full bisect. .. but without GCC_PLUGIN_RANDSTRUCT it's solid? Kees removed even the baseline "randomize pure function pointer structures", so at that commit, nothing should be randomized. But maybe the plugin code itself ends up confusing gcc somehow? Even when it doesn't actually do that "relayout_struct()" on the structure, it always does those TYPE_ATTRIBUTES() games. Linus
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.