From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from einhorn-mail-out.in-berlin.de (einhorn-mail-out.in-berlin.de [217.197.80.21]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8858B3858010 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 19:02:02 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 8858B3858010 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ubuntu.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=doko@ubuntu.com X-Envelope-From: doko@ubuntu.com Received: from authenticated.user (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by einhorn.in-berlin.de with ESMTPSA id 0ARJ1wC6016269 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 27 Nov 2020 20:01:59 +0100 Subject: Re: [PATCH] INSTALL: Default to --enable-cet=auto To: "H.J. Lu" , Richard Biener , Iain Buclaw Cc: GCC Patches References: <20201127134211.1808714-1-hjl.tools@gmail.com> From: Matthias Klose Message-ID: Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 20:01:57 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.3.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, GIT_PATCH_0, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 19:02:13 -0000 On 11/27/20 3:54 PM, H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches wrote: > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 6:24 AM Richard Biener wrote: >> >> OK. >> >> On Fri, 27 Nov 2020, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >>> PR other/98027 >>> * doc/install: Default to --enable-cet=auto. >>> --- >>> gcc/doc/install.texi | 9 ++++----- >>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/gcc/doc/install.texi b/gcc/doc/install.texi >>> index 5f879ca4cea..021c347cc09 100644 >>> --- a/gcc/doc/install.texi >>> +++ b/gcc/doc/install.texi >>> @@ -2259,11 +2259,10 @@ instrumentation, see @option{-fcf-protection} option. When >>> to add @option{-fcf-protection} and, if needed, other target >>> specific options to a set of building options. >>> >>> -The option is disabled by default. When @code{--enable-cet=auto} >>> -is used, it is enabled on Linux/x86 if target binutils >>> -supports @code{Intel CET} instructions and disabled otherwise. >>> -In this case the target libraries are configured to get additional >>> -@option{-fcf-protection} option. >>> +@code{--enable-cet=auto} is default. CET is enabled on Linux/x86 if >>> +target binutils supports @code{Intel CET} instructions and disabled >>> +otherwise. In this case, the target libraries are configured to get >>> +additional @option{-fcf-protection} option. >>> >>> @item --with-riscv-attribute=@samp{yes}, @samp{no} or @samp{default} >>> Generate RISC-V attribute by default, in order to record extra build >>> >> > > OK for backport to GCC 10? I only found that because of failing package builds in a test rebuild. See PR98025. Is it safe to backport that, if it breaks the ABI of a runtime library shipped with GCC 10? Matthias