Allwinner devices are OK, Exynos devices (except 4210) are OK.
------------------ Original ------------------
From: "Tony Lindgren"<tony@xxxxxxxxxxx>;
Date: Mon, Mar 26, 2018 11:37 PM
To: "陈华才"<chenhc@xxxxxxxxxx>;
Cc: "Andrew Morton"<akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Fabio Estevam"<festevam@xxxxxxxxx>; "Stephen Rothwell"<sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Rich Felker"<dalias@xxxxxxxx>; "Russell King"<linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Yoshinori Sato"<ysato@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "linux-kernel"<linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Ralf Baechle"<ralf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "linux-omap"<linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "James Hogan"<james.hogan@xxxxxxxx>; "moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE"<linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
Subject: Re: Regression with arm in next with stack protector
* 陈华才 <chenhc@xxxxxxxxxx> [180326 06:59]:
> Hi, Tony and Fabio,
>
> Could you please upload your kernel binary to somewhere for me? I don't understand why some ARM boards is OK while others are broken.
Well the kernel I'm testing is just current Linux next cross
compiled omap2plus_defconfig kernel. I do have few more config
options enabled like LOCKDEP and DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP, but I
doubt they matter here :)
Then I'm using gcc-7.3.0 and binutils-2.30 built with the
buildall.git scripts:
git://git.infradead.org/users/segher/buildall.git
If you still need binaries, let me know.
Do you know which arm devices are working with your patch?
Regards,
Tony��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{�������ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
