Re: Probe emission in fstack-clash-protection

> That may ultimately be better for -fstack-check to make it more robust, > but it still wouldn't be a viable alternative for stack clash protection > for the reasons laid out in that blog post. Well, -fstack-check does that when it's possible, e.g. on Windows, but it's not on x86[_64]/Linux wher

Re: Probe emission in fstack-clash-protection

* Varun Kumar E. via Gcc: > Hello, > > https://godbolt.org/z/P3M8s8jqh > The above case shows that gcc first decreases the stack pointer and then > probes. > > As mentioned by Jeff Law (reference >

[RISC-V] [SIG-toolchain] Meeting will be canceled (May 4, 2023)

Hi all, Tomorrow's meeting will be canceled, since there were few new topics to discuss. The next RISC-V GNU Toolchain meeting is collecting topics: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JSs-BSlPJ3QYbAb-Add1TlbYx0nOT1ur3jcsITIJ01U/edit?usp=sharing Please add what want to discuss in the next

gcc-10-20230503 is now available

Snapshot gcc-10-20230503 is now available on https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10-20230503/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 10 git branch with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch