From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CD80C433E1 for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 14:56:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4223E207F5 for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 14:56:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="S90pbrXY" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729115AbgFDO4n (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Jun 2020 10:56:43 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:57664 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729094AbgFDO4n (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Jun 2020 10:56:43 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x442.google.com (mail-pf1-x442.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::442]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3567BC08C5C1 for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 07:56:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x442.google.com with SMTP id f3so3346084pfd.11 for ; Thu, 04 Jun 2020 07:56:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=B0VRWP1UqHBzaSQ/0VAH8ROzdZmpnLpk8DQEvJRbm6g=; b=S90pbrXYQvAWuisADwIVqFJze1Gn3O7VI3b7ci34HlxsFIiSm55Agl3HtXdIfOtlj1 kFuWBlQoujZfnla0pnjl4P9hL71UlfgA047f6CDtcKWtqp78Vi3ktMNpDFcArsvn0Aa4 7gBNWjkF+L6ja8DfU5D6aFyeEosVd+IcgieMM= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=B0VRWP1UqHBzaSQ/0VAH8ROzdZmpnLpk8DQEvJRbm6g=; b=d/+awcQPScJnSMr+2NpUoazyy4z5PO3lWku03a9bUoza/sVL62ZfkvjTKE9jM2fFcR ZcoO61KduvGXT+Rm1CQ0XSybo/p+dAevcszshl/ipIKPdJ5b99Bw19pZvo4jO/CzNVUE uY4Oe7ClQROzJF+ezBt48WLUh3zw5o0OQKF/IsagS+KtEfQKPDrKPJ1N9RS/lXcMpALZ QXC2IFvgGjCI8fl4/gyBRU0X3bCAO6/lTTeRQb6LvnYQky9X+SuGULgYy9YZ3i0aHWta fGCR6fBN7/xq4W/aL7bko8sYFEPeCMqasGLnzUhoC1wEjv3l+Lf1i9g6e4F33Ci13Wu8 ERqw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533HEzUrxUZEMz/bPw3gX2AcO/bbFbEn27WnNFbzTv3jHh0DWa51 dTURGMvFjaQO77maqsMQZ5NNLA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwHMeBMoXoJ1oKRiY6CcT/MXQQ3/6BvMK96dAo5+DFFc+3InZktMIE/4pit2W9doT6CJHJfvw== X-Received: by 2002:a63:de18:: with SMTP id f24mr4660948pgg.415.1591282602661; Thu, 04 Jun 2020 07:56:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y10sm4390985pgi.54.2020.06.04.07.56.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 04 Jun 2020 07:56:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2020 07:56:40 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: Miguel Ojeda Cc: Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel , Linus Torvalds , Alexander Potapenko , Joe Perches , Andy Whitcroft , "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" , drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, b43-dev@lists.infradead.org, Network Development , linux-wireless , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, Linux-MM , clang-built-linux Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] x86/mm/numa: Remove uninitialized_var() usage Message-ID: <202006040745.525ECD1@keescook> References: <20200603233203.1695403-2-keescook@chromium.org> <874krr8dps.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-spi-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-spi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 01:41:07PM +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote: > On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 9:58 AM Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > but if we ever lose the 1 then the above will silently compile the code > > within the IS_ENABLED() section out. > > Yeah, I believe `IS_ENABLED()` is only meant for Kconfig symbols, not > macro defs in general. A better option would be `__is_defined()` which > works for defined-to-nothing too. Er? That's not what it looked like to me: #define IS_BUILTIN(option) __is_defined(option) #define IS_ENABLED(option) __or(IS_BUILTIN(option), IS_MODULE(option)) But just to be sure, I just tested in with a real build: [ 3.242160] IS_ENABLED(TEST_UNDEF) false [ 3.242691] __is_defined(TEST_UNDEF) false [ 3.243240] IS_ENABLED(TEST_VALUE_EMPTY) false [ 3.243794] __is_defined(TEST_VALUE_EMPTY) false [ 3.244353] IS_ENABLED(TEST_VALUE_1) true [ 3.244848] __is_defined(TEST_VALUE_1) true and nope, it only works with a defined value present. diff --git a/init/main.c b/init/main.c index 03371976d387..378a9e54b6dc 100644 --- a/init/main.c +++ b/init/main.c @@ -1406,6 +1406,34 @@ static int __ref kernel_init(void *unused) */ pti_finalize(); +#undef TEST_UNDEF + if (IS_ENABLED(TEST_UNDEF)) + pr_info("IS_ENABLED(TEST_UNDEF) true\n"); + else + pr_info("IS_ENABLED(TEST_UNDEF) false\n"); + if (__is_defined(TEST_UNDEF)) + pr_info("__is_defined(TEST_UNDEF) true\n"); + else + pr_info("__is_defined(TEST_UNDEF) false\n"); +#define TEST_VALUE_EMPTY + if (IS_ENABLED(TEST_VALUE_EMPTY)) + pr_info("IS_ENABLED(TEST_VALUE_EMPTY) true\n"); + else + pr_info("IS_ENABLED(TEST_VALUE_EMPTY) false\n"); + if (__is_defined(TEST_VALUE_EMPTY)) + pr_info("__is_defined(TEST_VALUE_EMPTY) true\n"); + else + pr_info("__is_defined(TEST_VALUE_EMPTY) false\n"); +#define TEST_VALUE_1 1 + if (IS_ENABLED(TEST_VALUE_1)) + pr_info("IS_ENABLED(TEST_VALUE_1) true\n"); + else + pr_info("IS_ENABLED(TEST_VALUE_1) false\n"); + if (__is_defined(TEST_VALUE_1)) + pr_info("__is_defined(TEST_VALUE_1) true\n"); + else + pr_info("__is_defined(TEST_VALUE_1) false\n"); + system_state = SYSTEM_RUNNING; numa_default_policy(); which means a few other __is_defined() users are not correct too... -- Kees Cook