On 1/22/23 8:28 PM, Peter Foley wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:34 PM Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 1/18/23 11:28 AM, Eduard Zingerman wrote:
While working on clang patch to disable stack protector
for BPF target I've noticed that there is an option to
disable default configuration file altogether [1]:
--no-default-config
Should we consider it instead of -fno-stack-protector
to shield ourselves from any potential distro-specific
changes?
Peter, could you help check whether adding --no-default-config works
in your environment or not?
[1] https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ClangCommandLineReference.html#cmdoption-clang-no-default-config
I guess I could, but I'm not convinced that's the right thing to do.
Ideally problems with distro-specific configs would cause loud
failures (like this one) and result in fixes like the changes being
made to upstream clang/gcc.
Simply unconditionally disabling distro configs seems to be the wrong
way to approach this and makes it less likely that future problems
will be reported in the first place.
Thanks for confirming. Eduard has implemented a proper fix in clang
(https://reviews.llvm.org/D142046) which will warn if -fstack-protector
is enabled. In gentoo case, since -fno-stack-protector is appended to
compilation flags, no warning will be issued, so we are all good here.
