linux-kernel - [tip:branch?] x86: Remove STACKPROTECTOR

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 24 Oct 2009 01:04:14 GMT
From:	tip-bot for Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...hat.com,
	arjan@...ux.intel.com, davej@...hat.com, arjan@...radead.org,
	cebbert@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...e.hu,
	sandeen@...hat.com
Subject: [tip:branch?] x86: Remove STACKPROTECTOR_ALL

Commit-ID:  14a3f40aafacde1dfd6912327ae14df4baf10304
Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/14a3f40aafacde1dfd6912327ae14df4baf10304
Author:     Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
AuthorDate: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 07:31:01 -0700
Committer:  Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CommitDate: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:35:23 +0200

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: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
Reported-by: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
LKML-Reference: <20091023073101.3dce4ebb@...radead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
---
 arch/x86/Kconfig  |    4 ----
 arch/x86/Makefile |    1 -
 2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
index 07e0114..72ace95 100644
--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
@@ -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
diff --git a/arch/x86/Makefile b/arch/x86/Makefile
index a012ee8..d2d24c9 100644
--- a/arch/x86/Makefile
+++ b/arch/x86/Makefile
@@ -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)
--
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/