Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 10:29:16 -0700 From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>, Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>, Ian Abbott <abbotti@....co.uk>, linux-input <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>, linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>, Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] Remove false-positive VLAs when using max() On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 4:47 AM, Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com> wrote: > > If you want to catch stack frames which have unbounded size, > -Werror=stack-usage=1000 or -Werror=vla-larger-than=1000 (with the constant > adjusted as needed) might be the better approach. No, we want to catch *variable* stack sizes. Does "-Werror=vla-larger-than=0" perhaps work for that? No, because the stupid compiler says that is "meaningless". And no, using "-Werror=vla-larger-than=1" doesn't work either, because the moronic compiler continues to think that "vla" is about the _type_, not the code: t.c: In function ‘test’: t.c:6:6: error: argument to variable-length array is too large [-Werror=vla-larger-than=] int array[(1,100)]; Gcc people are crazy. Is there really no way to just say "shut up about the stupid _syntax_ issue that is entirely irrelevant, and give us the _code_ issue". 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.