From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 3E848385AC3E; Tue, 19 Jul 2022 15:41:55 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 3E848385AC3E
From: "aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/81708] The x86 stack canary location should be
 customizable
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2022 15:41:55 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: REOPENED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ubizjak at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 8.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cc resolution
Message-ID: <bug-81708-4-LCiUgafW2c@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-81708-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-81708-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2022 15:41:55 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D81708

Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
                 CC|                            |aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
         Resolution|FIXED                       |---

--- Comment #15 from Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Uro=C5=A1,

stack-prot-sym.c fails on ia32 with PIC/PIE: the address/value of my_guard =
is
loaded from the GOT, instead of appearing as %gs:my_guard.

After being confused by the expectation that my_guard should be a LE TLS
symbol, I'm coming to the conclusion that my expectation was incorrect, and=
 it
is indeed supposed to be a plain offset, so the code is correct, if not as
efficient as on PDC.  Does that sound right?

I'm undecided as to whether avoiding the GOT reference, and requiring the
symbol to be usable as a link-time constant, would be desirable/doable.=20
Thoughts?=