public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stefan Hajnoczi <[email protected]>
To: Ammar Faizi <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected],
	Ammar Faizi <[email protected]>,
	Jens Axboe <[email protected]>, Jeff Moyer <[email protected]>,
	Alviro Iskandar Setiawan <[email protected]>,
	Guillem Jover <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: False positives in nolibc check
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 12:04:47 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230621100447.GD2667602@fedora> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2068 bytes --]

On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 10:49:08PM +0700, Ammar Faizi wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 03:31:52PM +0200, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > This is caused by the stack protector compiler options, which depend on
> > the libc __stack_chk_fail_local symbol.
> 
> Guillem fixed it last week. Does this commit fix the stack protector
> problem? https://github.com/axboe/liburing/commit/319f4be8bd049055c333185928758d0fb445fc43
> 
> > In general, I'm concerned that nolibc is fragile because the toolchain
> > and libc sometimes have dependencies that are activated by certain
> > compiler options. Some users will want libc and others will not. Maybe
> > make it an explicit option instead of probing?
> 
> I made nolibc always enabled because I don't see the need of using libc
> in liburing. If we have a real reason of using libc, maybe adding
> '--use-libc' is better than bringing back '--nolibc'. 
> 
> I agree with what Alviro said that using stack protector in liburing is
> too overkill. That's why I see no reason for the upstream to support it.
> 
> Can you mention other dependencies that do need libc? That information
> would be useful to consider bringing back libc to liburing.

I don't know which features require the toolchain and libc to cooperate.
I guess Thread Local Storage won't work and helper functions that
compilers emit (like the memset example that Alviro gave).

Disabling hardening because it requires work to support it in a nolibc
world seems dubious to me. I don't think it's a good idea for io_uring
to lower security because that hurts its image and reduces adoption.
Especially right now, when the security of io_uring is being scrutinized
(https://security.googleblog.com/2023/06/learnings-from-kctf-vrps-42-linux.html).

While I'm sharing these opinions with you, I understand that some people
want nolibc and are fine with disabling the stack protector. The main
thing I would like is for liburing to compile or fail with a clear error
message instead of breaking somewhere during the build.

Stefan

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-06-21 10:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-06-20 13:31 False positives in nolibc check Stefan Hajnoczi
2023-06-20 14:39 ` Alviro Iskandar Setiawan
2023-06-21  9:47   ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2023-06-20 15:49 ` Ammar Faizi
2023-06-20 16:16   ` Alviro Iskandar Setiawan
2023-06-21 10:04   ` Stefan Hajnoczi [this message]
2023-06-21 10:19     ` Ammar Faizi
2023-06-21 11:51       ` Guillem Jover
2023-06-21 16:08         ` Ammar Faizi
2023-07-12 15:00       ` Stefan Hajnoczi

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=20230621100447.GD2667602@fedora \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    /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