On Mon, 14 Nov 2005, Eric Christopher wrote: > > > >> apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault > > > > You will have to give us more info. Most gcc developers probably > > don't have a copy of UClibc, and plus it sounds like you have made > > gcc changes that weren't included in your message. So there isn't > > much we can do here except ask for more details. Try debugging the > > problem. If you can identify a specific problem here, and give us > > details about it, we can probably help. > > Also since __builtin_trap is used in the fail mechanism the comment > above the trap instruction in i386.md might be useful:
This is only true is libssp.so is used, I am using "established, working" exit code, that worked w/ earlier ssp as well (when it was not integrated) I mentioned that I use it as integrated into libc (exactly like glibc-cvs does), glibc uses libc_message iirc for exit. this should also influence the -fstack-protector behaviour, but that seems to be OK. __builtin_trap is used as I can see only if a vulnerability is found, this happens though on a simple hello world. Thanks, Peter > > ;; We used to use "int $5", in honor of #BR which maps to interrupt > vector 5. > ;; That, however, is usually mapped by the OS to SIGSEGV, which is often > ;; caught for use by garbage collectors and the like. Using an insn > that > ;; maps to SIGILL makes it more likely the program will rightfully die. > ;; Keeping with tradition, "6" is in honor of #UD. > > So you may be seeing something mapped odd, or... > > -eric > > -- Peter S. Mazinger <ps dot m at gmx dot net> ID: 0xA5F059F2 Key fingerprint = 92A4 31E1 56BC 3D5A 2D08 BB6E C389 975E A5F0 59F2
