On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 12:03:50PM +0200, Mathias Krause wrote: SNIP
> >> 1.7.10.4 > >> > > > > hum, how about fixing this once and for all.. ;-) > > please check attached patch, thanks > > Yeah, I thought about this option too but declined it for two reasons: > 1/ The kernel sources should provide good quality examples, even for > usage outside of the kernel. Imagine somebody taking the memcpy > implementation for his own project but not copying the LDFLAGS. That > would make his code have an executable stack while with the .GNU-stack > marker in the assembler file it won't. that 'somebody' should check/know better ;-) but ok, fair enough > 2/ What if somebody tries to add/link code to perf that makes use of > nested functions? That'll make perf fail as the trampoline code > generated by gcc won't be executable due to the enforced > non-executable stack by -Wl,-z,noexecstack. I guess in that case he would change the Makefile as well? anyway I have no objection for leaving that code in assembly objects, but I suggest we use the global option as well to prevent any future surprise.. or insert test case for perf's executable stack to 'perf test' thanks, jirka -- 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/
