Re: [PATCH v4 00/16] x86-64: Stack protector and percpu improvements

Ingo Molnar
2024-03-24T18:14:43Z

* Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > But, "make oldconfig" will still silently disable stack protector if
> > > the compiler doesn't support the new options. It does put the
> > > comment into the .config file though, so that may be enough.
> >
> > So I was thinking more along the lines of emitting an actual warning to
> > the build log, every time the compiler check is executed and fails to
> > detect [certain] essential or good-to-have compiler features.
> >
> > A bit like the red '[ OFF ]' build lines during the perf build:
> >
> > Auto-detecting system features:
> >
> > ... dwarf: [ on ]
> > ... dwarf_getlocations: [ on ]
> > ... glibc: [ on ]
> > ... libbfd: [ on ]
> > ... libbfd-buildid: [ on ]
> > ... libcap: [ on ]
> > ... libelf: [ on ]
> > ... libnuma: [ on ]
> > ... numa_num_possible_cpus: [ on ]
> > ... libperl: [ on ]
> > ... libpython: [ on ]
> > ... libcrypto: [ on ]
> > ... libunwind: [ on ]
> > ... libdw-dwarf-unwind: [ on ]
> > ... libcapstone: [ OFF ] <========
> > ... zlib: [ on ]
> > ... lzma: [ on ]
> > ... get_cpuid: [ on ]
> > ... bpf: [ on ]
> > ... libaio: [ on ]
> > ... libzstd: [ on ]
> >
> > ... or something like that.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ingo
>
> That list comes from the perf tool itself
> (tools/perf/builtin-version.c), not the kernel config or build system.

Yeah, I know, I wrote the initial version. ;-)

( See upstream commits b6aa9979416e~1..4cc9117a35b2 )

> Something like that could be added to the main kernel build. But it
> should be a separate patch series as it will likely need a lot of design
> iteration.

Doesn't have to be complicated really, but obviously not a requirement for
this series.

Thanks,

Ingo