From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
To: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh@sourceware.org>
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cdefs: Limit definition of fortification macros
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2023 18:48:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87cz6tuvj6.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230130133217.497398-1-siddhesh@sourceware.org> (Siddhesh Poyarekar's message of "Mon, 30 Jan 2023 08:32:17 -0500")
* Siddhesh Poyarekar:
> Define the __glibc_fortify and other macros only when __FORTIFY_LEVEL >
> 0. This has the effect of not defining these macros on older C90
> compilers that do not have support for variable length argument lists.
>
> Also trim off the trailing backslashes from the definition of
> __glibc_fortify and __glibc_fortify_n macros.
>
> Signed-off-by: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh@sourceware.org>
> ---
>
> Only tested for sanity. Florian, can you please verify that this
> resolves the original problem?
>
> misc/sys/cdefs.h | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/misc/sys/cdefs.h b/misc/sys/cdefs.h
> index 66d6702123..c37a3ff637 100644
> --- a/misc/sys/cdefs.h
> +++ b/misc/sys/cdefs.h
> @@ -152,6 +152,7 @@
> # define __glibc_objsize(__o) __bos (__o)
> #endif
>
> +#if __USE_FORTIFY_LEVEL > 0
> /* Compile time conditions to choose between the regular, _chk and _chk_warn
> variants. These conditions should get evaluated to constant and optimized
> away. */
> @@ -187,7 +188,7 @@
> ? __ ## f ## _alias (__VA_ARGS__) \
> : (__glibc_unsafe_len (__l, __s, __osz) \
> ? __ ## f ## _chk_warn (__VA_ARGS__, __osz) \
> - : __ ## f ## _chk (__VA_ARGS__, __osz))) \
> + : __ ## f ## _chk (__VA_ARGS__, __osz)))
>
> /* Fortify function f, where object size argument passed to f is the number of
> elements and not total size. */
> @@ -197,7 +198,8 @@
> ? __ ## f ## _alias (__VA_ARGS__) \
> : (__glibc_unsafe_len (__l, __s, __osz) \
> ? __ ## f ## _chk_warn (__VA_ARGS__, (__osz) / (__s)) \
> - : __ ## f ## _chk (__VA_ARGS__, (__osz) / (__s)))) \
> + : __ ## f ## _chk (__VA_ARGS__, (__osz) / (__s))))
> +#endif
>
> #if __GNUC_PREREQ (4,3)
> # define __warnattr(msg) __attribute__((__warning__ (msg)))
Seems reasonable, thanks. I believe it works with those old compilers.
Reviewed-by: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Florian
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-01 17:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-30 7:58 C90 header compatibility Florian Weimer
2023-01-30 12:26 ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2023-01-30 12:43 ` Florian Weimer
2023-01-30 13:32 ` [PATCH] cdefs: Limit definition of fortification macros Siddhesh Poyarekar
2023-02-01 17:48 ` Florian Weimer [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87cz6tuvj6.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com \
--to=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=siddhesh@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).