On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 02:53:05PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tue, Apr 22, 2025, at 14:25, Mickaël Salaün wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 20, 2025 at 05:08:59PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > >> Unnamed static initializers aren't supported by the randstruct GCC > >> plugin. Quoting the plugin, "set up a bogus anonymous struct field > >> designed to error out on unnamed struct initializers as gcc provides > >> no other way to detect such code". That is exactly what happens > >> with the landlock code, so adjust the static initializers for structs > >> lsm_ioctlop_audit and landlock_request that contain a randomized structure > >> (struct path) to use named variables, which avoids the intentional > >> GCC crashes: > > > > This is not a sustainable solution. Could we fix the plugin instead? > > This new Landlock change may be the first to trigger this plugin bug but > > it will probably not be the last to use unnamed static initializers. > > Forbidding specific C constructs should be documented. > > I think the version from Kees' patch looks more readable than > the version with the compound literal, so it certainly seems appropriate > as an immediate regression fix, even if it's possible to fix the > plugin later. > > >> We went 8 years before tripping over this! > > Right, it's probably enough to revisit the plugin code after > it happens again.
Yeah, that's my thinking as well. > >> Closes: > >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/337d5d4887277b27+3c677db3-a8b9-47f0-93a4-7809355f1...@uniontech.com/ > >> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <k...@kernel.org> > > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> Thanks! Mickaël, are you good with this for now, and if so, do you want to carry it or shall I? -Kees -- Kees Cook
