Received: by 2002:a05:6358:11c7:b0:104:8066:f915 with SMTP id i7csp126702rwl; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 13:41:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350b6v4zy9w8AFtz+zKMnfqrfPfNXBfaEkSuZUWMH2ycIapiaDQ7y+KnT9L3RzaKucbZJLK1t X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:7cd4:b0:930:6db6:39c0 with SMTP id h20-20020a1709067cd400b009306db639c0mr313041ejp.61.1679604063417; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 13:41:03 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1679604063; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=pOgjzY6reLNcQWy5C0Mt/H6ZfNb+KgIDR+uxJnyu3I5ejTh/PHQ66PGCj5OQrzSsKG mzgMRvHWo4wUYmIQTI6fLNKWfuZOrnC11Nq/R2BfvKl+jlZUtped3Kf3ioOsnmqoGCu3 5g5KfvG2KYhOIHTXMcNfMdLSmSq0t8QK4kUdOimIK9q6ca4+o4toCnwaUqTItJsOfiKq tttu2GMZFUJG5fPtJQGo2bVlK7DWsIan1QcNaQyHmta7E3VikHFeWRp+MRWDDlZhz43L G4itbw08AzAEBGNMtAelkU70xJc38Yq9AEqNxXvbM9lmW7Rqf6izP5NU59IwMWfrwhf5 +8Rg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=P3CLXwg0FU5lx4UBspFt6Dy5oMKLHSwtWELR1XmTwPM=; b=zOauoFWlRorSYfOtfG8/+ip0JIKJyeFAaNg8OrseZFH6vs7g0abzwJc59pv2kB1VFs g2/PgIKiK+ahyFfilajhleiRzq9U92mRnzLGuuvDwTWivsSZn3nCy+JPm6NZICw9zsao q7Vvx4Uuj4msDkobvzOd37f1TzPeSk/FzzTU33Be6P74EbarDSfgt55dnXkdg7tQkUM5 O3lGYeESJs3yDtoo9SWbiyvU8Rfc+xqIeYWKH86pvufm+GPwN19/H7RHNw443ahGu0KZ 3MA0KWO+vJGl1RZWFom0JH86YD7EJY2Q3HS8Nce9X65l873Qm2bxkwyyeTI9dCvsJ7Er FffQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id y11-20020aa7c24b000000b005021f0d576csi92372edo.691.2023.03.23.13.40.36; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 13:41:03 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231359AbjCWUUF (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 23 Mar 2023 16:20:05 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:39220 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229502AbjCWUUD (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Mar 2023 16:20:03 -0400 Received: from 1wt.eu (wtarreau.pck.nerim.net [62.212.114.60]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95758132F3; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 13:20:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from willy@localhost) by mail.home.local (8.17.1/8.17.1/Submit) id 32NKJmDF022966; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 21:19:48 +0100 Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2023 21:19:48 +0100 From: Willy Tarreau To: Thomas =?iso-8859-1?Q?Wei=DFschuh?= Cc: Shuah Khan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] tools/nolibc: x86_64: add stackprotector support Message-ID: References: <20230223-nolibc-stackprotector-v2-0-4c938e098d67@weissschuh.net> <20230223-nolibc-stackprotector-v2-8-4c938e098d67@weissschuh.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20230223-nolibc-stackprotector-v2-8-4c938e098d67@weissschuh.net> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Thomas, On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 03:41:08PM +0000, Thomas Wei?schuh wrote: > Enable the new stackprotector support for x86_64. (...) > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/Makefile > index 8f069ebdd124..543555f4cbdc 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/Makefile > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/Makefile > @@ -80,6 +80,8 @@ CFLAGS_STACKPROTECTOR = -DNOLIBC_STACKPROTECTOR \ > $(call cc-option,-mstack-protector-guard=global) \ > $(call cc-option,-fstack-protector-all) > CFLAGS_i386 = $(CFLAGS_STACKPROTECTOR) > +CFLAGS_x86_64 = $(CFLAGS_STACKPROTECTOR) > +CFLAGS_x86 = $(CFLAGS_STACKPROTECTOR) > CFLAGS_s390 = -m64 > CFLAGS ?= -Os -fno-ident -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables \ > $(call cc-option,-fno-stack-protector) \ This change is making it almost impossible for me to pass external CFLAGS without forcefully disabling the automatic detection of stackprot. I need to do it for some archs (e.g. "-march=armv5t -mthumb") or even to change optimization levels. I figured that the simplest way to recover that functionality for me consists in using a dedicated variable to assign stack protector per supported architecure and concatenating it to the per-arch CFLAGS like this: diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/Makefile index 543555f4cbdc..bbce57420465 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/Makefile +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/Makefile @@ -79,13 +79,13 @@ endif CFLAGS_STACKPROTECTOR = -DNOLIBC_STACKPROTECTOR \ $(call cc-option,-mstack-protector-guard=global) \ $(call cc-option,-fstack-protector-all) -CFLAGS_i386 = $(CFLAGS_STACKPROTECTOR) -CFLAGS_x86_64 = $(CFLAGS_STACKPROTECTOR) -CFLAGS_x86 = $(CFLAGS_STACKPROTECTOR) +CFLAGS_STKP_i386 = $(CFLAGS_STACKPROTECTOR) +CFLAGS_STKP_x86_64 = $(CFLAGS_STACKPROTECTOR) +CFLAGS_STKP_x86 = $(CFLAGS_STACKPROTECTOR) CFLAGS_s390 = -m64 CFLAGS ?= -Os -fno-ident -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables \ $(call cc-option,-fno-stack-protector) \ - $(CFLAGS_$(ARCH)) + $(CFLAGS_STKP_$(ARCH)) $(CFLAGS_$(ARCH)) LDFLAGS := -s help: And now with this it works again for me on all archs, with all of them showing "SKIPPED" for the -fstackprotector line except i386/x86_64 which show "OK". Are you OK with this approach ? And if so, do you want to respin it or do you want me to retrofit it into your 3 patches that introduce this change (it's easy enough so I really don't care) ? Thanks! Willy