From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
To: Nix <nix@esperi.org.uk>
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org,
Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/12] De-PLTize __stack_chk_fail internal calls within libc.so.
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 14:21:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <78b1f109-91e5-4150-4c00-15a86aacb2f7@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y3zhjn1s.fsf@esperi.org.uk>
On 12/15/2016 03:15 PM, Nix wrote:
> Possible fix, untested:
>
> diff --git a/sysdeps/generic/symbol-hacks.h b/sysdeps/generic/symbol-hacks.h
> index 36908b5..0679354 100644
> --- a/sysdeps/generic/symbol-hacks.h
> +++ b/sysdeps/generic/symbol-hacks.h
> @@ -7,5 +7,7 @@ asm ("memcpy = __GI_memcpy");
>
> /* -fstack-protector generates calls to __stack_chk_fail, which need
> similar adjustments to avoid going through the PLT. */
> +#if defined __SSP__ || defined __SSP_ALL__ || defined __SSP_STRONG__
> asm ("__stack_chk_fail = __stack_chk_fail_local");
> #endif
> +#endif
The condition looks rather brittle. What if GCC grows an
-fstack-protector-light switch and __SSP_LIGHT__ macro?
I wonder if it's better to add something to $(no-stack-protector) and
use that in the conditional.
Thanks,
Florian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-15 14:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-28 12:33 --enable-stack-protector for glibc, v9 Nix
2016-11-28 12:33 ` [PATCH 07/12] Add stack_chk_fail_local to libc.so Nix
2016-11-28 12:33 ` [PATCH 04/12] Compile the entire dynamic linker with -fno-stack-protector Nix
2016-11-28 12:33 ` [PATCH 06/12] Work even with compilers hacked to enable -fstack-protector by default Nix
2016-11-28 12:33 ` [PATCH 03/12] Mark all machinery needed in early static-link init as -fno-stack-protector Nix
2016-12-15 14:01 ` Florian Weimer
2016-12-15 14:21 ` Nick Alcock
2016-12-15 14:31 ` Florian Weimer
2016-12-15 14:44 ` Nick Alcock
2016-11-28 12:33 ` [PATCH 12/12] Enable -fstack-protector=* when requested by configure Nix
2016-11-28 13:25 ` [PATCH 10/12] Drop explicit stack-protection of pieces of the system Nix
2016-11-28 13:25 ` [PATCH 08/12] De-PLTize __stack_chk_fail internal calls within libc.so Nix
2016-12-15 13:56 ` Florian Weimer
2016-12-15 14:16 ` Nix
2016-12-15 14:21 ` Florian Weimer [this message]
2016-12-15 14:29 ` Nix
2016-12-15 14:33 ` Florian Weimer
2016-12-15 14:40 ` Nix
2016-12-15 17:24 ` Nix
2016-12-15 18:22 ` Florian Weimer
2016-12-15 20:00 ` Nix
2016-12-15 20:22 ` Florian Weimer
2016-12-15 20:44 ` Florian Weimer
2016-12-15 20:49 ` Nix
2016-12-15 20:58 ` Florian Weimer
2016-12-16 11:39 ` Florian Weimer
2016-12-16 11:44 ` Nix
2016-11-28 13:25 ` [PATCH 09/12] Link various tests with -fno-stack-protector Nix
2016-12-15 14:43 ` Florian Weimer
2016-12-15 14:54 ` Nix
2016-12-15 15:54 ` Florian Weimer
2016-12-15 15:56 ` Nix
2016-12-15 15:55 ` Nix
2016-11-28 13:26 ` [PATCH 05/12] Prevent the rtld mapfile computation from dragging in __stack_chk_fail* Nix
2016-11-28 13:26 ` [PATCH 02/12] Do not stack-protect ifunc resolvers Nix
2016-12-15 12:18 ` Florian Weimer
2016-12-15 12:34 ` Nick Alcock
2016-12-15 12:58 ` Florian Weimer
2016-11-28 13:26 ` [PATCH 01/12] Initialize the stack guard earlier when linking statically Nix
2016-11-28 13:26 ` [PATCH 11/12] Do not stack-protect sigreturn stubs Nix
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=78b1f109-91e5-4150-4c00-15a86aacb2f7@redhat.com \
--to=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=nix@esperi.org.uk \
/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).