| Message ID | 20230523-nolibc-stackprotector-gcc9-v1-0-3e4804235d50@weissschuh.net (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | tools/nolibc: stack protector compatibility fixes | expand |
Hi Thomas, On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 08:44:41AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote: > Two fixes for nolibc to > * allow users to explicitly disable (or theoretically enable) when > building the tests > * fix stackprotectors on GCC < 10. Nice, thank you. Just tested with gcc 9.5, works both with and without stkp. Now pushed to branch 20230524-nolibc-rv32+stkp4. I've dropped my exp patch and the associated revert. I think your two patches that clean up the makefile options and the new one here that restores the cflags should be squashed since the latter just partially reverts the former, and that way the series remains bisectable. Just let me know if you're OK, I can just to that and re-push. Have a nice day! Willy
On 2023-05-24 09:35:30+0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 08:44:41AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote: > > Two fixes for nolibc to > > * allow users to explicitly disable (or theoretically enable) when > > building the tests > > * fix stackprotectors on GCC < 10. > > Nice, thank you. Just tested with gcc 9.5, works both with and without > stkp. Now pushed to branch 20230524-nolibc-rv32+stkp4. I've dropped my > exp patch and the associated revert. I think your two patches that clean > up the makefile options and the new one here that restores the cflags > should be squashed since the latter just partially reverts the former, > and that way the series remains bisectable. Just let me know if you're > OK, I can just to that and re-push. Sounds good to me! Thomas
On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 09:38:44AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote: > On 2023-05-24 09:35:30+0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > Hi Thomas, > > > > On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 08:44:41AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote: > > > Two fixes for nolibc to > > > * allow users to explicitly disable (or theoretically enable) when > > > building the tests > > > * fix stackprotectors on GCC < 10. > > > > Nice, thank you. Just tested with gcc 9.5, works both with and without > > stkp. Now pushed to branch 20230524-nolibc-rv32+stkp4. I've dropped my > > exp patch and the associated revert. I think your two patches that clean > > up the makefile options and the new one here that restores the cflags > > should be squashed since the latter just partially reverts the former, > > and that way the series remains bisectable. Just let me know if you're > > OK, I can just to that and re-push. > > Sounds good to me! Now done, keeping the first commit's message (still valid) and force-pushed. thanks! Willy
Two fixes for nolibc to * allow users to explicitly disable (or theoretically enable) when building the tests * fix stackprotectors on GCC < 10. Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@weissschuh.net> --- Thomas Weißschuh (3): Revert "EXP: tools/nolibc: partially revert stackprotector compiler flags" selftests/nolibc: allow disabling of stackprotector support tools/nolibc: fix segfaults on compilers without attribute no_stack_protector tools/include/nolibc/arch-aarch64.h | 2 +- tools/include/nolibc/arch-arm.h | 2 +- tools/include/nolibc/arch-i386.h | 2 +- tools/include/nolibc/arch-loongarch.h | 2 +- tools/include/nolibc/arch-mips.h | 2 +- tools/include/nolibc/arch-riscv.h | 2 +- tools/include/nolibc/arch-x86_64.h | 2 +- tools/include/nolibc/compiler.h | 10 ++++++++++ tools/include/nolibc/stackprotector.h | 2 +- tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/Makefile | 13 ++----------- 10 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) --- base-commit: 8213b0cdb51d1f66af713e00fd0dff3c2eb47636 change-id: 20230523-nolibc-stackprotector-gcc9-8eebd10a7968 Best regards,