From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934200AbYEFXmD (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 May 2008 19:42:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755241AbYEFXlv (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 May 2008 19:41:51 -0400 Received: from mga12.intel.com ([143.182.124.36]:6926 "EHLO azsmga102.ch.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753787AbYEFXlu (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 May 2008 19:41:50 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 572 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 06 May 2008 19:41:50 EDT X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.27,445,1204531200"; d="scan'208";a="242988591" Message-ID: <4820EA7B.4050406@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 16:32:11 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kevin Winchester CC: David Miller , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu Subject: Re: linux-next: WARNING: at kernel/panic.c:375 __stack_chk_test+0x50/0x54() References: <20080501043313.02205bbd@linux.intel.com> <481CF3B1.2020307@gmail.com> <4820B64D.4000805@linux.intel.com> <20080506.133416.241365936.davem@davemloft.net> <4820E529.2030801@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4820E529.2030801@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Kevin Winchester wrote: > David Miller wrote: >> From: Arjan van de Ven >> Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 12:49:33 -0700 >> >>> this is weird; something is adding ANOTHER -fstack-protector to the >>> (effective) gcc >>> flags.. which might be overriding the -fstack-protector-all setting. >>> >>> I wonder if this is a distro special ;( >> >> Ubuntu adds -fstack-protector to the GCC command line. >> >> But I've been able to override it trivially when, for example, doing >> GCC builds, by simply adding -fno-stack-protector. > > I assume adding -fno-stack-protector would not really be an option in > this case (since if I understand correctly it would be appended to the > end of the flags which would turn the option off). > > I guess I'll be figuring out how to build my own gcc... one question (since I don't have an ubuntu system on my desk right now) if you do make V=1 kernel/panic.o (after deleting that file if needed), can you check that -fstack-protector-all is the last stack protector option we explicitly give to gcc ? (anything else is distro special which we unfortunately cannot fix.. but maybe we can detect) >