This adds a hopefully helpful comment above the (seemingly weird) compiler flag selection logic. Suggested-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> --- Makefile | 16 ++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index 13175632137f..ea88e68d121e 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -630,6 +630,22 @@ KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-option,-Wframe-larger-than=${CONFIG_FRAME_WARN}) endif # Handle stack protector mode. +# +# Since kbuild can potentially perform two passes (first with the old +# .config values and then with updated .config values), we cannot error out +# if a desired compiler option is unsupported. If we were to error, kbuild +# could never get to the second pass and actually notice that we changed +# the option to something that was supported. +# +# Additionally, we don't want to fallback and/or silently change which compiler +# flags will be used, since that leads to producing kernels with different +# security feature characteristics depending on the compiler used. ("But I +# selected CC_STACKPROTECTOR_STRONG! Why did it build with _REGULAR?!") +# +# The middle ground is to warn here so that the failed option is obvious, but +# to let the build fail with bad compiler flags so that we can't produce a +# kernel when there is a CONFIG and compiler mismatch. +# ifdef CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR_REGULAR stackp-flag := -fstack-protector ifeq ($(call cc-option, $(stackp-flag)),) -- 1.7.9.5 -- Kees Cook Chrome OS Security -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html