[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091108122226.GC11372@elte.hu>
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 13:22:26 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Michael Cree <mcree@...on.net.nz>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [alpha] Add minimal support for software performance
events.
* Michael Cree <mcree@...on.net.nz> wrote:
> > Should be done not by removing the stack-protector build
> > unconditionally - but by auto-testing whether stackprotector is
> > supported by GCC and using it if yes.
>
> Revised patch attached. It includes a test that the compiler doesn't
> bomb out with -fstack-protector-all and only adds the option to CFLAGS
> if ok. But I have had to put the test below the definition of the
> macro CC. This has the side effect of separating the addition of
> -fstack-protector-all from the main definitions of CFLAGS and
> ALL_CFLAGS, and is not ideal in my opinion. The patch also removes
> -Wcast-align (I forgot to say that in the commit message of the
> patch).
Nice, i'll queue this up for Linus.
Your S-O-B line was missing from this second patch - i presume you
intended it to be included, right?
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists