Glibc 2.12 issue
michael.hope at linaro.org
Thu Sep 2 00:37:31 BST 2010
Hi Chung-Lin. Could you please take care of this upstream? The short
story is that many distributions, including Fedora and Ubuntu, build
GCC with the stack protector turned on by default. This is both
inappropriate for and could interfere with libgcc. We'd like to
ensure the stack protector is turned off by adding
-fno-stack-protector to the libgcc build rules.
I've created LP: #628526 to track this. See the link below for how
Ubuntu does it. I'd like the change in Linaro GCC 4.4 and 4.5.
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Michael Hope <michael.hope at linaro.org> wrote:
> I agree. It's also inappropriate for something as low level as libgcc
> to have dependencies on other libraries such as libssp.
> We'll propose a patch adding '-fno-stack-protector' to the gcc list
> and see how it goes.
> -- Michael
> On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery.com> wrote:
>> On 9/1/2010 2:10 PM, Michael Hope wrote:
>>> 3. Should libgcc be built without -fstack-protector?
>> To put it more strongly, I believe that libgcc should not be built with
>> I don't think there's any reason to expect that all code in libgcc would
>> continue to work with stack-protection checks inserted (e.g., low-level
>> primitives for thread safety or exception-handling, where chaos may
>> ensue if a fault occurs in the midst of the stack-protection code).
>> Furthermore, those checks will increase overhead for all users of the
>> library. And, if libgcc has dependencies on other shared libraries,
>> that could potentially break binary compatibility across Linux
>> If someone wants to build libgcc with -fstack-protector, that would
>> require an assessment of all code in libgcc to make sure that is safe.
>> libgcc is emphatically not "application" code.
>> Mark Mitchell
>> mark at codesourcery.com
>> (650) 331-3385 x713
>> linaro-toolchain mailing list
>> linaro-toolchain at lists.linaro.org
More information about the linaro-toolchain