On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 10:46:00PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote: > Hi Jiri, > > 2013-11-25 (월), 17:03 +0100, Jiri Olsa: > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 12:47:14AM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote: > > > 2013-11-21 (목), 12:01 +0100, Jiri Olsa: > > > > In order to get the proper plugins processing we need to > > > > use full trace-event interface when creating tracepoint > > > > events. So far we were using shortcut to get the parsed > > > > format. > > > > > > > > Moving current 'event_format__new' function into trace-event > > > > object as 'trace_event__tp_format'. > > > > > > > > This function uses properly initialized global trace-event > > > > object, ensuring proper plugins processing. > > > > > > I see this when I compile it on my old ubuntu 10.04 box (with gcc 4.4.3) > > > > > > CC util/trace-event.o > > > cc1: warnings being treated as errors > > > util/trace-event.c: In function 'trace_event__tp_format': > > > util/trace-event.c:63: error: not protecting function: no buffer at > > > least 8 bytes long > > > make[1]: *** [util/trace-event.o] Error 1 > > > > hum, what was the stackprotector status? > > > > ... stackprotector: [ on ] > > ... stackprotector-all: [ on ] > > Right. Both of them were turned on. > > Auto-detecting system features: > ... backtrace: [ on ] > ... dwarf: [ on ] > ... fortify-source: [ on ] > ... glibc: [ on ] > ... gtk2: [ on ] > ... gtk2-infobar: [ on ] > ... libaudit: [ on ] > ... libbfd: [ on ] > ... libelf: [ on ] > ... libelf-getphdrnum: [ OFF ] > ... libelf-mmap: [ on ] > ... libnuma: [ OFF ] > ... libperl: [ on ] > ... libpython: [ on ] > ... libpython-version: [ on ] > ... libslang: [ on ] > ... libunwind: [ OFF ] > ... on-exit: [ on ] > ... stackprotector: [ on ] > ... stackprotector-all: [ on ] > ... timerfd: [ on ]
I found that -fstack-protector might not always work: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.5/+bug/691722 they say it was fixed in gcc 4.5.0 which I was not able to prove in gcc release notes.. we could disable the warning like in the below for gcc < 4.5.0, could you please test? any other idea? ;-) thanks, jirka --- diff --git a/tools/perf/config/feature-checks/test-stackprotector.c b/tools/perf/config/feature-checks/test-stackprotector.c index c9f398d..c0ace8b 100644 --- a/tools/perf/config/feature-checks/test-stackprotector.c +++ b/tools/perf/config/feature-checks/test-stackprotector.c @@ -1,5 +1,13 @@ #include <stdio.h> +#define GCC_VERSION (__GNUC__ * 10000 \ + + __GNUC_MINOR__ * 100 \ + + __GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__) + +#if GCC_VERSION < 40500 +#error "failed" +#endif + int main(void) { return puts("hi"); -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
