This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Avoid backtrace from __stack_chk_fail [BZ #12189]

From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
To: Florian Weimer <fw at deneb dot enyo dot de>
Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 13:25:06 -0700
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Avoid backtrace from __stack_chk_fail [BZ #12189]
Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
References: <20170710200054.GA11938@gmail.com> <87pod7cq9r.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <20170711132509.GA3054@gmail.com> <87r2xm930u.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 12:39 PM, Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> wrote:
> * H. J. Lu:
>
>> +CFLAGS-tst-ssp-1.c = -fstack-protector
>
> This should be -fstack-protector-all, in case the the stack protector
> heuristics do not instrument a thirty-byte array.

Does GCC 4.9 support  -fstack-protector-all?

-- 
H.J.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] Avoid backtrace from __stack_chk_fail [BZ #12189]
  - From: Florian Weimer

References:
- [PATCH] Avoid backtrace from __stack_chk_fail [BZ #12189]
  - From: H.J. Lu
- Re: [PATCH] Avoid backtrace from __stack_chk_fail [BZ #12189]
  - From: Florian Weimer
- Re: [PATCH] Avoid backtrace from __stack_chk_fail [BZ #12189]
  - From: H.J. Lu
- Re: [PATCH] Avoid backtrace from __stack_chk_fail [BZ #12189]
  - From: Florian Weimer

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]