On Sun, Dec 08, 2024 at 09:42:28PM +0530, Nilay Shroff wrote: > Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> As this is different, my Ack does not still stand, sorry :( > +# Currently, disable -Wstringop-overread for gcc-13+ and FORTIFY_SOURCE globally. > +config GCC13_NO_STRINGOP_OVERREAD > + def_bool y I hit this with gcc 14, it's not just a gcc 13 issue. > +config CC_NO_STRINGOP_OVERREAD > + bool > + default y if CC_IS_GCC && GCC_VERSION >= 130000 && GCC13_NO_STRINGOP_OVERREAD && FORTIFY_SOURCE Ok, I see you enabled this for more than 13, but why call it "13"? > + > # > # For architectures that know their GCC __int128 support is sound > # > diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.extrawarn b/scripts/Makefile.extrawarn > index 1d13cecc7cc7..1abd41269fd0 100644 > --- a/scripts/Makefile.extrawarn > +++ b/scripts/Makefile.extrawarn > @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ endif > KBUILD_CPPFLAGS-$(CONFIG_WERROR) += -Werror > KBUILD_CPPFLAGS += $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS-y) > KBUILD_CFLAGS-$(CONFIG_CC_NO_ARRAY_BOUNDS) += -Wno-array-bounds > +KBUILD_CFLAGS-$(CONFIG_CC_NO_STRINGOP_OVERREAD) += -Wno-stringop-overread I don't want this disabled for all files in the kernel, we only have one that this is a problem for. I think you disable this, the whole fortify logic is disabled which is not the goal, why not just force the fortify feature OFF if we have a "bad compiler" that can not support it? So no, I don't think this is the correct solution here, sorry. And it's odd that we are the only 2 people hitting it, has everyone else just given up on gcc and moved on to using clang? thanks, greg k-h
