Messages in this thread |  | | From | Kees Cook <> | Date | Sun, 11 Feb 2018 13:05:12 -0800 | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 4/7] kconfig: support new special property shell= |
| |
On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Ulf Magnusson <ulfalizer@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 6:56 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote: >> Old? That's not the case. The check for -fno-stack-protector will >> likely be needed forever, as some distro compilers enable >> stack-protector by default. So when someone wants to explicitly build >> without stack-protector (or if the compiler's stack-protector is >> detected as broken), we must force it off for the kernel build. > > What I meant is whether it makes sense to test if the > -fno-stack-protector option is supported. Can we reasonably assume > that passing -fno-stack-protector to the compiler won't cause an > error?
That isn't something I've tested; but I can check if it's useful.
> Is it possible to build GCC with no "no stack protector" support? Do > we need to support any compilers that would choke on the > -fno-stack-protector flag itself? > > If we can reasonably assume that passing -fno-stack-protector is safe, > then CC_HAS_STACKPROTECTOR_NONE isn't needed.
Well, there are two situations:
- does the user want to build _without_ stack protector? (which is something some people want to do, no matter what I think of it)
- did _AUTO discover that stack protector output is broken?
In both cases, we need to pass -fno-stack-protector in case the distro compiler was built with stack protector enabled by default.
-Kees
-- Kees Cook Pixel Security
|  |