Here's the rationale for _ALL from lkml.  If _ALL is needed to catch
vmsplice-like stuff, we should use it.  As for performance, it seems
that only limited situations on already slow x86 hardware would even
notice the effect on the icache.  We should obviously make sure it
actually works, of course.  :)

---
* Kees Cook <[email protected]> wrote:
> What is the rationale for why CC_STACKPROTECTOR_ALL is forced when 
> using CC_STACKPROTECTOR?  I would have expected _ALL to be a 
> separate option (as it was in earlier versions), but it seems it 
> is forced on by commit 113c5413cf9051cc50b88befdc42e3402bb92115.

it used to be a separate option. I merged them into one, because we 
had too many options really, and because the vmsplice exploit would 
only have been caught by the _ALL variant. So the 'light' variant 
never really worked well IMO.

        Ingo

-- 
enable kernel stack protection
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/369152
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to