Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 01 Jul 2006 16:26:28 -0700 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: 2.6.17-mm5 -- Busted toolchain? -- usr/klibc/exec_l.c:59: undefined reference to `__stack_chk_fail' |
| |
H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Sam Ravnborg wrote: >> >> For klibc you need to patch scripts/Kbuild.klibc >> >> Appending it to KLIBCWARNFLAGS seems the right place. > > KLIBCREQFLAGS, rather. > >> Do you know from what gcc version we can start using >> -fno-stack-protector? > > Isn't there a macro to test if gcc supports a specific option already? > > Either way, I can also add __stack_chk_fail() as an alias for abort(), > for people who actually want the feature. >
I looked at it again, and it looks like gcc depends on the TLS ABI in order to pick the value of the cookie. That makes it a potentially lot more cantankerous option; I would like to be able to support stack-smash checking in klibc, but if it means implementing TLS on all architectures, then that would really defeat the purpose (and we should add -fno-stack-protector to KLIBCREQFLAGS.)
Arjan: I see a few stack-protector-related have your name on it, do you have any details on implementation constraints for this across architectures?
-hpa - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |