public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: hpa@zytor.com, jeremy@goop.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
	rusty@rustcorp.com.au
Subject: [PATCH] stackprotector: fix multi-word cross-builds
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:18:46 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090211111846.GA22772@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090211105729.GO20518@elte.hu>


* Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:

> 
> * Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> > Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >>> I'll try other compilers but which version are you using?  The
> > >>> difference is that before the patchset, -fno-stack-protector was
> > >>> always added whether stackprotector was enabled or not so this problem
> > >>> wasn't visible (at the cost of bogus stackprotector of course).  We'll
> > >>> probably need to add __stack_chk_guard or disable if gcc generates
> > >>> such symbol.  I'll play with different gccs.
> > >> Can't reproduce with gcc-4.1 or 4.2.  Any chance you're using distcc
> > >> w/ a build machine w/ glibc < 2.4?  __stack_chk_guard is the symbol
> > >> gcc fetches stack canary from if TLS is not supported, so somehow gcc
> > >> thought that TLS wasn't available while building head64.
> > > 
> > > yeah - i also used distcc. Maybe the nostackp makefile magic gets confused
> > > about that?
> > 
> > It seems that even with the same gcc versions, gcc built against libc
> > w/o TLS support generates __stack_chk_guard, so if you mix the two
> > flavors, the has-stack-protector check can be compiled on machines w/
> > TLS while some other files end up being built on machines w/o TLS
> > support thus circumventing the support check.  Can you please see
> > whether non-distcc build fails too?
> 
> That build succeeds:
> 
> rhea:~/tip> make -j30 bzImage ARCH=x86_64 CROSS_COMPILE='/opt/crosstool/gcc-4.2.3-glibc-2.3.6/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-'
> /home/mingo/tip/arch/x86/Makefile:82: stack protector enabled but no compiler support
>   CHK     include/linux/version.h
> [...]
> BFD: arch/x86/boot/compressed/vmlinux.bin: warning: allocated section `.bss' not in segment
> [...]
> Root device is (8, 3)
> Setup is 11996 bytes (padded to 12288 bytes).
> System is 5690 kB
> CRC be1b2e21
> Kernel: arch/x86/boot/bzImage is ready  (#3)
> 
> Some shell variable expansion bug? If CROSS_COMPILE is not a single word
> we fail to detect the compiler borkage at arch/x86/Makefile line 82?

Yep - i'm testing the fix below now - it's looking good so far.

	Ingo

---------->
>From ebd9026d9f8499abc60d82d949bd37f88fe34a41 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:17:29 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] stackprotector: fix multi-word cross-builds

Stackprotector builds were failing if CROSS_COMPILER was more than
a single world (such as when distcc was used) - because the check
scripts used $1 instead of $*.

Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
---
 scripts/gcc-x86_32-has-stack-protector.sh |    2 +-
 scripts/gcc-x86_64-has-stack-protector.sh |    2 +-
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/scripts/gcc-x86_32-has-stack-protector.sh b/scripts/gcc-x86_32-has-stack-protector.sh
index 4fdf6ce..29493dc 100644
--- a/scripts/gcc-x86_32-has-stack-protector.sh
+++ b/scripts/gcc-x86_32-has-stack-protector.sh
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 #!/bin/sh
 
-echo "int foo(void) { char X[200]; return 3; }" | $1 -S -xc -c -O0 -fstack-protector - -o - 2> /dev/null | grep -q "%gs"
+echo "int foo(void) { char X[200]; return 3; }" | $* -S -xc -c -O0 -fstack-protector - -o - 2> /dev/null | grep -q "%gs"
 if [ "$?" -eq "0" ] ; then
 	echo y
 else
diff --git a/scripts/gcc-x86_64-has-stack-protector.sh b/scripts/gcc-x86_64-has-stack-protector.sh
index 2d69fcd..afaec61 100644
--- a/scripts/gcc-x86_64-has-stack-protector.sh
+++ b/scripts/gcc-x86_64-has-stack-protector.sh
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 #!/bin/sh
 
-echo "int foo(void) { char X[200]; return 3; }" | $1 -S -xc -c -O0 -mcmodel=kernel -fstack-protector - -o - 2> /dev/null | grep -q "%gs"
+echo "int foo(void) { char X[200]; return 3; }" | $* -S -xc -c -O0 -mcmodel=kernel -fstack-protector - -o - 2> /dev/null | grep -q "%gs"
 if [ "$?" -eq "0" ] ; then
 	echo y
 else

  reply	other threads:[~2009-02-11 11:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-02-09 13:39 [PATCHSET x86/master] add stack protector support for x86_32 Tejun Heo
2009-02-09 13:39 ` [PATCH 01/11] x86: include correct %gs in a.out core dump Tejun Heo
2009-02-09 17:12   ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-02-09 13:39 ` [PATCH 02/11] x86: math_emu info cleanup Tejun Heo
2009-02-09 13:42   ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-09 13:45     ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-09 13:52       ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-09 13:39 ` [PATCH 03/11] x86: fix math_emu register frame access Tejun Heo
2009-02-09 17:13   ` Brian Gerst
2009-02-09 23:40     ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-10  1:08     ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-09 13:39 ` [PATCH 04/11] elf: add ELF_CORE_COPY_KERNEL_REGS() Tejun Heo
2009-02-09 13:39 ` [PATCH 05/11] x86: stackprotector.h misc update Tejun Heo
2009-02-09 13:39 ` [PATCH 06/11] stackprotector: update make rules Tejun Heo
2009-02-09 13:39 ` [PATCH 07/11] x86: no stack protector for vdso Tejun Heo
2009-02-09 13:39 ` [PATCH 08/11] x86: use asm .macro instead of cpp #define in entry_32.S Tejun Heo
2009-02-09 18:34   ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-02-10  1:14     ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-10  1:18       ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-02-10 11:11         ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-09 13:39 ` [PATCH 09/11] x86: add %gs accessors for x86_32 Tejun Heo
2009-02-09 13:39 ` [PATCH 10/11] x86: make lazy %gs optional on x86_32 Tejun Heo
2009-02-09 18:12   ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-02-10  1:27     ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-10  1:51       ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-02-09 13:39 ` [PATCH 11/11] x86: implement x86_32 stack protector Tejun Heo
2009-02-10 15:25   ` Brian Gerst
2009-02-10 15:39     ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-11  7:31       ` [PATCH x86#core/percpu] x86: fix x86_32 stack protector bugs Tejun Heo
2009-02-11 10:34         ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-11 14:18           ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-09 13:55 ` [PATCHSET x86/master] add stack protector support for x86_32 Ingo Molnar
2009-02-09 14:06   ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-09 20:30     ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-10 13:56       ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-10 14:16         ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-09 14:12   ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-10 13:54     ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-10 14:16       ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-10 14:20         ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-10 14:26           ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-11 10:57             ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-11 11:18               ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-02-11 14:19                 ` [PATCH] stackprotector: fix multi-word cross-builds Tejun Heo
2009-02-10 14:19       ` [PATCHSET x86/master] add stack protector support for x86_32 Ingo Molnar
2009-02-09 14:09 ` Brian Gerst
2009-02-09 14:15   ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-10  1:36     ` Tejun Heo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20090211111846.GA22772@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jeremy@goop.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox