The correct syntax for gcc -x is "gcc -x assembler", not
"gcc -xassembler". Even though the latter happens to work, the former
is what is documented in the manual page and thus what gcc wrappers
such as icecream do expect.
This isn't a cosmetic change. The missing space prevents icecream from
recognizing compilation tasks it can't handle, leading to silent kernel
miscompilations.
Besides me, credits go to Michael Matz and Dirk Mueller for
investigating the miscompilation issue and tracking it down to this
incorrect -x parameter syntax.
Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de>
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Bernhard Walle <bernhard@bwalle.de>
Cc: Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>
Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Signed-off-by: Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>
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>
Impact: stack protector for x86_32
Implement stack protector for x86_32. GDT entry 28 is used for it.
It's set to point to stack_canary-20 and have the length of 24 bytes.
CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR turns off CONFIG_X86_32_LAZY_GS and sets %gs
to the stack canary segment on entry. As %gs is otherwise unused by
the kernel, the canary can be anywhere. It's defined as a percpu
variable.
x86_32 exception handlers take register frame on stack directly as
struct pt_regs. With -fstack-protector turned on, gcc copies the
whole structure after the stack canary and (of course) doesn't copy
back on return thus losing all changed. For now, -fno-stack-protector
is added to all files which contain those functions. We definitely
need something better.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Jean Delvare
Ingo Molnar
Tejun Heo