linux-kernel - Re: Regression [Was: Boot hang with stack protector on x86

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:59:31 -0800
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: Regression [Was: Boot hang with stack protector on x86_64]

On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:43:08 -0800 (PST)
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> 
> 
> On Fri, 22 Feb 2008, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> >
> > This is a regression. Can you please revert this commit.
> 
> Not really. The thing is, CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR has never done
> anything at all, now it does, and it shows that it never worked.
> 
> So the commit that made it do something shouldn't be reverted, but 
> CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR should be marked BROKEN, because it
> obviously is broken right now.
> 
> But keeping the config option, and just not making it do anything is 
> misleading and wrong.
> 
> So just something like this? To make sure normal people don't enable
> it..


looks fair; once the patches to make it work are merged the B0RKEN can
go away again easliy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/