On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 1:04 AM Yafang Shao <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: Yafang shao <[email protected]> > > A build failure has been reported with the following details: > > In file included from include/linux/string.h:390, > from include/linux/bitmap.h:13, > from include/linux/cpumask.h:12, > from include/linux/smp.h:13, > from include/linux/lockdep.h:14, > from include/linux/spinlock.h:63, > from include/linux/wait.h:9, > from include/linux/wait_bit.h:8, > from include/linux/fs.h:6, > from kernel/auditsc.c:37: > In function 'sized_strscpy', > inlined from '__audit_ptrace' at kernel/auditsc.c:2732:2: > >> include/linux/fortify-string.h:293:17: error: call to '__write_overflow' > >> declared with attribute error: detected write beyond size of object (1st > >> parameter) > 293 | __write_overflow(); > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > In function 'sized_strscpy', > inlined from 'audit_signal_info_syscall' at kernel/auditsc.c:2759:3: > >> include/linux/fortify-string.h:293:17: error: call to '__write_overflow' > >> declared with attribute error: detected write beyond size of object (1st > >> parameter) > 293 | __write_overflow(); > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > The issue appears to be a GCC bug, though the root cause remains > unclear at this time. For now, let's implement a workaround. > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]> > Closes: > https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/[email protected]/ > Reported-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <[email protected]> > Closes: > https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ > Reported-by: "Zhuo, Qiuxu" <[email protected]> > Closes: > https://lore.kernel.org/all/cy8pr11mb71348e568dbda576f17daff389...@cy8pr11mb7134.namprd11.prod.outlook.com/ > Originally-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-hardening/202410171059.C2C395030@keescook/ > Signed-off-by: Yafang shao <[email protected]> > Tested-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <[email protected]> > --- > kernel/auditsc.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Thanks, does anyone have a link to the GCC bug report? We really should mention that in the commit description and/or metadata. > diff --git a/kernel/auditsc.c b/kernel/auditsc.c > index 279ba5c420a4..561d96affe9f 100644 > --- a/kernel/auditsc.c > +++ b/kernel/auditsc.c > @@ -2728,8 +2728,8 @@ void __audit_ptrace(struct task_struct *t) > context->target_auid = audit_get_loginuid(t); > context->target_uid = task_uid(t); > context->target_sessionid = audit_get_sessionid(t); > - security_task_getlsmprop_obj(t, &context->target_ref); > strscpy(context->target_comm, t->comm); > + security_task_getlsmprop_obj(t, &context->target_ref); > } > > /** > @@ -2755,8 +2755,8 @@ int audit_signal_info_syscall(struct task_struct *t) > ctx->target_auid = audit_get_loginuid(t); > ctx->target_uid = t_uid; > ctx->target_sessionid = audit_get_sessionid(t); > - security_task_getlsmprop_obj(t, &ctx->target_ref); > strscpy(ctx->target_comm, t->comm); > + security_task_getlsmprop_obj(t, &ctx->target_ref); > return 0; > } > > -- > 2.43.5 -- paul-moore.com
