On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 08:55:35AM +0800, Guo Ren wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 4:31 AM Kees Cook wrote:
> > Sure -- I assume get_cycles64() is architecturally "simple"? (i.e. it
> > doesn't require that the entire time-keeping subsystem has started?)
> Yes, it's just a csr read. But it's necess
On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 4:31 AM Kees Cook wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 05, 2020 at 10:16:14PM +0800, Guo Ren wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 2:53 PM Kees Cook wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jul 05, 2020 at 06:24:15AM +, guo...@kernel.org wrote:
> > > > +static __always_inline void boot_init_stack_canary(voi
On Sun, Jul 05, 2020 at 10:16:14PM +0800, Guo Ren wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 2:53 PM Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 05, 2020 at 06:24:15AM +, guo...@kernel.org wrote:
> > > +static __always_inline void boot_init_stack_canary(void)
> > > +{
> > > + unsigned long canary;
> > > +
> > >
Hi Kees,
On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 2:53 PM Kees Cook wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 05, 2020 at 06:24:15AM +, guo...@kernel.org wrote:
> > From: Guo Ren
> >
> > The -fstack-protector & -fstack-protector-strong features are from
> > gcc. The patch only add basic kernel support to stack-protector
> > fea
On Sun, Jul 05, 2020 at 06:24:15AM +, guo...@kernel.org wrote:
> From: Guo Ren
>
> The -fstack-protector & -fstack-protector-strong features are from
> gcc. The patch only add basic kernel support to stack-protector
> feature and some arch could have its own solution such as
> ARM64_PTR_AUTH.
From: Guo Ren
The -fstack-protector & -fstack-protector-strong features are from
gcc. The patch only add basic kernel support to stack-protector
feature and some arch could have its own solution such as
ARM64_PTR_AUTH.
After enabling STACKPROTECTOR and STACKPROTECTOR_STRONG, the .text
size is ex
6 matches
Mail list logo
