提交 14a3f40a 编写于 作者: A Arjan van de Ven 提交者: Ingo Molnar

x86: Remove STACKPROTECTOR_ALL

STACKPROTECTOR_ALL has a really high overhead (runtime and stack
footprint) and is not really worth it protection wise (the
normal STACKPROTECTOR is in effect for all functions with
buffers already), so lets just remove the option entirely.
Reported-by: NDave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Reported-by: NChuck Ebbert <cebbert@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NArjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
LKML-Reference: <20091023073101.3dce4ebb@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
上级 02dd0a06
......@@ -1443,12 +1443,8 @@ config SECCOMP
If unsure, say Y. Only embedded should say N here.
config CC_STACKPROTECTOR_ALL
bool
config CC_STACKPROTECTOR
bool "Enable -fstack-protector buffer overflow detection (EXPERIMENTAL)"
select CC_STACKPROTECTOR_ALL
---help---
This option turns on the -fstack-protector GCC feature. This
feature puts, at the beginning of functions, a canary value on
......
......@@ -76,7 +76,6 @@ ifdef CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR
cc_has_sp := $(srctree)/scripts/gcc-x86_$(BITS)-has-stack-protector.sh
ifeq ($(shell $(CONFIG_SHELL) $(cc_has_sp) $(CC) $(biarch)),y)
stackp-y := -fstack-protector
stackp-$(CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR_ALL) += -fstack-protector-all
KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(stackp-y)
else
$(warning stack protector enabled but no compiler support)
......
Markdown is supported
0% .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
先完成此消息的编辑!
想要评论请 注册