[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <573EAD0B.7090005@au1.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 16:22:03 +1000
From: Andrew Donnellan <andrew.donnellan@....ibm.com>
To: pageexec@...email.hu, Emese Revfy <re.emese@...il.com>,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc: linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, spender@...ecurity.net, mmarek@...e.com,
keescook@...omium.org, linux@...musvillemoes.dk,
fengguang.wu@...el.com, dvyukov@...gle.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, david.brown@...aro.org,
yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Daniel Axtens <dja@...ens.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/4] GCC plugin infrastructure
On 19/05/16 18:24, PaX Team wrote:
> the earlier plugin capable gcc versions used to install gcc headers in a somewhat
> ad-hoc manner resulting in compile time breakage for plugins and since some of
> those potentially missing headers are target specific, each target arch should
> be verified before enabling plugin support on them. things have much improved with
> gcc 5 (see https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61176) though there's still
> an occasional missing header but with wider use of plugins they will hopefully be
> discovered earlier now. perhaps linux-arch should be cc'ed on the plugin infrastructure
> so that arch maintainers are aware of this?
Upon further testing it does seem we've got header issues as well as
hitting a segfault on 4.7.0. Looking into it further...
--
Andrew Donnellan OzLabs, ADL Canberra
andrew.donnellan@....ibm.com IBM Australia Limited
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
