From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 284FEC74A5B for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2023 15:17:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232488AbjCZPRp (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Mar 2023 11:17:45 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50892 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229665AbjCZPRm (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Mar 2023 11:17:42 -0400 Received: from 1wt.eu (wtarreau.pck.nerim.net [62.212.114.60]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2364659C for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2023 08:17:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from willy@localhost) by mail.home.local (8.17.1/8.17.1/Submit) id 32QFHXJE010520; Sun, 26 Mar 2023 17:17:33 +0200 Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2023 17:17:33 +0200 From: Willy Tarreau To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: linux@weissschuh.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] tools/nolibc: add support for stack protector Message-ID: References: <20230325154516.7995-1-w@1wt.eu> <0d9bbc94-7ea2-4bc5-8523-29b100c0f1a1@paulmck-laptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 08:13:48AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 09:36:28PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 04:45:08PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > > Hello Paul, > > > > > > This is essentially Thomas' work so instead of paraphrasing his work, > > > I'm pasting his description below. I've tested his changes on all > > > supported archs, applied a tiny modification with his permission > > > to continue to support passing CFLAGS, and for me this is all fine. > > > In a short summary this adds support for stack protector to i386 and > > > x86_64 in nolibc, and the accompanying test to the selftest program. > > > > > > A new test category was added, "protection", which currently has a > > > single test. Archs that support it will report "OK" there and those > > > that do not will report "SKIPPED", as is already the case for tests > > > that cannot be run. > > > > > > This was applied on top of your dev.2023.03.20a branch. I'm reasonably > > > confident with the nature of the changes, so if your queue for 6.4 is > > > not closed yet, it can be a good target, otherwise 6.5 will be fine as > > > well. > > > > I have applied and pushed it out, thank you both! > > > > We are a little late in the process, but if testing goes well, I can't > > see why this cannot make the v6.4 merge window. > > And "make run-user" says "124 test(s) passed", which looks promising. Indeed! > But "make run" says "0 test(s) passed". > > (They initially both said "0 test(s) passed", but that was because I > forgot to build qemu-x86_64 after an upgrade.) > > Please see below for the full output of "make run". Am I missing > some other package? Hmmm I think that the output of run.out will be needed here. We'll need to understand whether it fails to boot the kernel or to start the executable. Willy