On Wed, 2 Jul 2014 17:51:00 -0700 Kees Cook <kees@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > It's hard to tell what the original author wanted, perhaps they wanted
> > it to error out. It looks intentional. Clearly they didn't think of randconfig
> > though.
>
> The problem is that if you make kbuild hard-fail when selecting this missing
> compiler option, you can never switch it back because "make menuconfig" will
> refuse to build since the compiler option would be missing. Being silent
> about the missing option (and/or falling back to other options) means that
> you could get two different kernel features selection with the same CONFIG_*
> set, depending on the kernel, which is extremely bad ("I selected
> stack-protector-strong but it built without it?!").
>
> So, the middle ground was to warn about it during the kbuild logic so
> you could find the source of the problem, but ultimately fail the build
> when the compiler doesn't support it so there weren't any silent failure
> modes.
--- a/Makefile~a
+++ a/Makefile
@@ -630,6 +630,9 @@ KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-option,-Wfram
endif
# Handle stack protector mode.
+#
+# This space reserved for Kees
+#
ifdef CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR_REGULAR
stackp-flag := -fstack-protector
ifeq ($(call cc-option, $(stackp-flag)),)
_
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
