On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 04:01:17PM -0500, Daniele Buono wrote:
> On 3/2/2021 11:40 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > The CFI protection is something I'd say is relevant to virtualization
> > use cases, not to emulation use cases
> >
> > https://qemu-project.gitlab.io/qemu/system/security.html
On 3/2/2021 11:40 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
The CFI protection is something I'd say is relevant to virtualization
use cases, not to emulation use cases
https://qemu-project.gitlab.io/qemu/system/security.html
IOW, the targets that are important to test are the ones where KVM
is availabl
On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 11:31:54AM -0500, Daniele Buono wrote:
>
> On 3/2/2021 10:38 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > Is this scenario going to upset CFI, or is it happy that 'void *'
> > is compatible with 'mytype *', and ok with the intermediate casts
> > to/from GCallback ?
>
> This is a val
On 3/2/2021 10:38 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
Is this scenario going to upset CFI, or is it happy that 'void *'
is compatible with 'mytype *', and ok with the intermediate casts
to/from GCallback ?
This is a valid scenario. LLVM does offer the ability of considering all
pointer types comp
On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 08:18:03AM -0500, Daniele Buono wrote:
> On 3/2/2021 5:30 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 03:39:42PM -0500, Daniele Buono wrote:
> > > Hi Daniel,
> > >
> > > On 3/1/2021 10:08 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > > > What are the unique failure scenar
On 3/2/2021 5:30 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 03:39:42PM -0500, Daniele Buono wrote:
Hi Daniel,
On 3/1/2021 10:08 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
What are the unique failure scenarios for CFI that these jobs are
likely to expose ? Is it likely that we'll have cases where
On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 03:39:42PM -0500, Daniele Buono wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> On 3/1/2021 10:08 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > What are the unique failure scenarios for CFI that these jobs are
> > likely to expose ? Is it likely that we'll have cases where
> > CFI succeeds in say, x86_64 targ
Hi Daniel,
On 3/1/2021 10:08 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
What are the unique failure scenarios for CFI that these jobs are
likely to expose ? Is it likely that we'll have cases where
CFI succeeds in say, x86_64 target, but fails in aarch64 target ?
For CFI to fail (even if it shouldn't) you'
On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 09:59:22AM -0500, Daniele Buono wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> On 3/1/2021 5:06 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 10:21:06AM -0500, Daniele Buono wrote:
> > > Build jobs are on the longer side (about 2h and 20m), but I thought it
> > > would be better to ju
Hi Daniel,
On 3/1/2021 5:06 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 10:21:06AM -0500, Daniele Buono wrote:
Build jobs are on the longer side (about 2h and 20m), but I thought it
would be better to just have 6 large jobs than tens of smaller ones.
IMHO that is a not viable.
Our
On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 10:21:06AM -0500, Daniele Buono wrote:
> Build jobs are on the longer side (about 2h and 20m), but I thought it
> would be better to just have 6 large jobs than tens of smaller ones.
IMHO that is a not viable.
Our longest job today is approx 60 minutes, and that is already
For a few months now QEMU has had options to enable compiler-based
control-flow integrity if built with clang.
While this feature has a low maintenance, It's probably still better to
add tests to the CI environment to check that an update doesn't break it.
The patchset allow gitlab testing of:
*
12 matches
Mail list logo
