[PATCH 1/2] start_kernel: add no_stack_protector fn attr

2023-04-17 Thread ndesaulniers
Back during the discussion of commit a9a3ed1eff36 ("x86: Fix early boot crash on gcc-10, third try") we discussed the need for a function attribute to control the omission of stack protectors on a per-function basis; at the time Clang had support for no_stack_protector but GCC did not. This was

Re: [PATCH 1/2] start_kernel: add no_stack_protector fn attr

2023-04-13 Thread Michael Ellerman
ndesaulni...@google.com writes: > Back during the discussion of > commit a9a3ed1eff36 ("x86: Fix early boot crash on gcc-10, third try") > we discussed the need for a function attribute to control the omission > of stack protectors on a per-function basis; at the time Clang had > support for

Re: [PATCH 1/2] start_kernel: add no_stack_protector fn attr

2023-04-12 Thread Nathan Chancellor
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 11:32:12AM -0700, ndesaulni...@google.com wrote: > Back during the discussion of > commit a9a3ed1eff36 ("x86: Fix early boot crash on gcc-10, third try") > we discussed the need for a function attribute to control the omission > of stack protectors on a per-function basis;

Re: [PATCH 1/2] start_kernel: add no_stack_protector fn attr

2023-04-12 Thread Miguel Ojeda
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 8:32 PM wrote: > > include/linux/compiler_attributes.h | 12 Acked-by: Miguel Ojeda Cheers, Miguel

[PATCH 1/2] start_kernel: add no_stack_protector fn attr

2023-04-12 Thread ndesaulniers
Back during the discussion of commit a9a3ed1eff36 ("x86: Fix early boot crash on gcc-10, third try") we discussed the need for a function attribute to control the omission of stack protectors on a per-function basis; at the time Clang had support for no_stack_protector but GCC did not. This was