[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140703010019.GS19781@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 18:00:19 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To: Kees Cook <kees@...flux.net>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
sfr@...b.auug.org.au, mhocko@...e.cz
Subject: Re: mmotm 2014-07-02-15-07 uploaded (stack protector)
> The problem is that if you make kbuild hard-fail when selecting this missing
> compiler option, you can never switch it back because "make menuconfig" will
> refuse to build since the compiler option would be missing. Being silent
> about the missing option (and/or falling back to other options) means that
> you could get two different kernel features selection with the same CONFIG_*
> set, depending on the kernel, which is extremely bad ("I selected
> stack-protector-strong but it built without it?!").
The assumption that every flag in a .config has been consciouscly
selected by a human is a quite dubious one ...
LTO just turns itself off if the toolchain doesn't support it.
> So, the middle ground was to warn about it during the kbuild logic so
> you could find the source of the problem, but ultimately fail the build
> when the compiler doesn't support it so there weren't any silent failure
> modes.
Longer term it would be of course best to move all the cc-options
probing into Kconfig. I bet that would speed up builds too.
-Andi
--
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