On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 12:51:47PM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> It would be much nicer if we had the flexibility to disable stack
> protectors per function, rather than per translation unit. I'm going
> to encourage you to encourage your favorite compile vendor ("write to
> your senator") to support the function attribute
> __attribute__((no_stack_protector)) so that one day, we can use that
> to stop shipping crap like a9a3ed1eff360 ("x86: Fix early boot crash
> on gcc-10, third try").
I think we were all in favour of having that, not sure why it hasn't
happened yet. More important matters I suppose :/
