From: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>,
Jeff Law <suzanne.jeff.law@gmail.com>
Cc: gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFA/RFC] Stack clash mitigation patch 02/08
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 16:28:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ff676a81-848f-ccd0-3707-64a6f7d18ea2@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <59437b9f-e0d8-02dd-06fd-1b2542213cf0@redhat.com>
On 07/13/2017 04:54 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 07/12/2017 07:44 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>>> /* The default is not to move the stack pointer. */
>>> +/* The default is not to move the stack pointer, unless we are using
>>> + stack clash prevention stack checking. */
>>> #ifndef STACK_CHECK_MOVING_SP
>>> -#define STACK_CHECK_MOVING_SP 0
>>> +#define STACK_CHECK_MOVING_SP\
>>> + (flag_stack_check == STACK_CLASH_BUILTIN_STACK_CHECK)
>>> #endif
>>
>> Missing space before that backslash.
> Similarly.
>
>>
>> The documentation for STACK_CHECK_CONFIG_SP needs updating (its default
>> is no longer zero, for one).
> Yea. Missed that. I actually need to go back and look at this again.
> I'm not entirely sure it's necessary -- it may be a relic from when I
> thought more -fstack-check infrastructure was going to be reusable.
Just a follow-up to myself. As I suspected, we can just drop the
STACK_CHECK_MOVING_SP changes. Between changes in overall direction and
moving stack-clash protection out of -fstack-check=
STACK_CHECK_MOVING_SP changes simply aren't needed anymore.
jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-14 16:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-11 21:20 Jeff Law
2017-07-13 1:44 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-07-13 22:54 ` Jeff Law
2017-07-14 16:28 ` Jeff Law [this message]
2017-07-17 17:46 ` Jeff Law
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ff676a81-848f-ccd0-3707-64a6f7d18ea2@redhat.com \
--to=law@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=suzanne.jeff.law@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).