From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261215AbVBFMsz (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Feb 2005 07:48:55 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261222AbVBFMsz (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Feb 2005 07:48:55 -0500 Received: from mail-ex.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:62091 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261215AbVBFMsk (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Feb 2005 07:48:40 -0500 Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2005 13:48:32 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: Arjan van de Ven Cc: Andi Kleen , akpm@osdl.org, torvalds@osdl.org, mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, drepper@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL/PATCH] Remove PT_GNU_STACK support before 2.6.11 Message-ID: <20050206124832.GE30109@wotan.suse.de> References: <20050206113635.GA30109@wotan.suse.de> <20050206114758.GA8437@infradead.org> <20050206123355.GB30109@wotan.suse.de> <1107693622.22680.86.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1107693622.22680.86.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 01:40:22PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Sun, 2005-02-06 at 13:33 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > Your main objection is that *incorrect* programs that assume they can > > > execute malloc() code without PROT_EXEC protection. For legacy binaries > > > keeping this behavior makes sense, no objection from me. > > > > > > For newly compiled programs this is just wrong and incorrect. > > > > That's not true as the grub/mono/... experience shows. > > both those apps are buggy and incorrect though and should be fixed. They worked fine forever - and suddenly you define them as buggy. This might be, but it's still quite bad to change the definition of what is buggy and what is not so suddenly in a "mostly stable" release series. And who tells the users what is considered buggy this week? -Andi