linux-kernel - more build problems with "Makefile: move stackprotector availability out of Kconfig"

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAK8P3a3ppb1hB0rahY+BXNbMzzKq6b0QorjJE8HqaKWcxmW3iQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 17 Oct 2017 13:00:48 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: more build problems with "Makefile: move stackprotector availability
 out of Kconfig"

Hi Kees,

On my test box, current linux-next kernels fail to build due to the
patch that introduces CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR_AUTO, with my mainline
gcc
builds up to gcc-5.5.0. gcc-6 and higher work fine, as
scripts/gcc-x86_64-has-stack-protector.sh returns 'y' for those.

Using the compilers provided by Ubuntu (4.6/4.7/4.8/4.9), everything
also works as expected, so my interpretation is that mainline gcc did
not enable the stack protector until gcc-6, while distributions did.

Do you agree with that interpretation?

If yes, is there anything we can do about it? I can probably rebuild
my collection of x86 compilers to enable stackprotector if necessary,
but I wonder how many other people will run into the same problem.

      Arnd