On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 12:42 PM, Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> good catch!
> I wonder why sched.h is using this flag insead of relying on #defines from 
> autoconf.h
> It could have been using CONFIG_HAVE_CC_STACKPROTECTOR

Thanks for your reply Alexei. I think switching to
HAVE_CC_STACKPROTECTOR could indeed solve this particular BPF issue in
a cleaner way (I tested it), at the cost of having that struct member
always present for the supported architectures even if the stack
protector is actually disabled (e.g. CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR_NONE=y).

Not sure if this could be frowned upon by someone considering how
critical task_struct is, but on the other hand is really just 8 bytes.


Reply via email to