Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 27 Mar 2023 17:54:11 +0200 | From | Willy Tarreau <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 6/8] tools/nolibc: tests: add test for -fstack-protector |
| |
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 06:32:51PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 09:42:29PM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 10:38:39PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > > > > I'm not seeing any issue with your approach instead, let's > > > > keep it as-is for now (also it does what the stack protector is supposed > > > > to catch anyway). > > > > > > There are no guarantess about stack layout and dead writes. > > > The test doesn't corrupt stack reliably, just 99.99% reliably. > > > > Sure but it's for a regtest which can easily be adjusted and its > > posrtability and ease of maintenance outweights its reliability, > > especially when in practice what the code does is what we want to > > test for. And if an extra zero needs to be added to the loop, it > > can be at a lower cost than maintaining arch-specific asm code. > > For the record, I disagree. Use volatile writes at least.
Yeah I agree on the volatile one.
Willy
| |