From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Christoph Egger" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Add support for OpenBSD Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 09:25:11 +0200 Message-ID: <200610180925.12277.Christoph.Egger@amd.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com Cc: Anil Madhavapeddy List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Wednesday 18 October 2006 18:27, Keir Fraser wrote: > On 18/10/06 17:17, "Anil Madhavapeddy" wrote: > >> I applied your second patch, but not the third (SSP/ProPolice) one > >> as I > >> don't understand why it's needed. If there's some extra magic in > >> OpenBSD's > >> gcc, I hope there is a flag we can specify to turn it off for the > >> hypervisor > >> itself. > > > > It's enabled by default in OpenBSD's modified gcc-3.3.5, turn it off > > with CFLAGS+= -fno-stack-protector > > We have that already in arch/x86/Rules.mk. If that was working, I doubt > Christoph would have gone to the trouble of hacking up the SSP goop. I did this work in August. There wasn't anything SSP-related there. So without SSP support, I got into linking errors. Now that the work is done, why shouldn't it go in?