[LinuxBIOS] Possible stack protect solutions
jordan.crouse at amd.com
Wed Dec 19 20:36:06 CET 2007
On 19/12/07 13:51 -0500, Corey Osgood wrote:
> Jordan Crouse wrote:
> > I need a community vote. There is an lingering stack protect issue
> > in LinuxBIOS, and it hits us when we port new platforms. The problem is
> > that not all of the lines in the various Config.lb files that compile
> > code also include the $(CPU_OPT) variable that we use to pass in the
> > -fno-stack-protector from buildrom.
> > So I offer these two possible solutions. One is a patch to buildrom that
> > changes how we pass in the -fno-stack-protect flag (thanks to Marc for
> > the patch). The other is a patch to LinuxBIOS itself to fix the actual
> > problem and pass $(CPU_OPT) where appropriate in the mainboard Config.lb
> > files.
> > So I leave it to the community - which solution do we prefer? One one
> > hand, the buildrom solution only affects targets when built by buildrom,
> > so abuild and other tools aren't affected, though it glosses over the real
> > problem.
> > On the other hand, any tools who may find CPU_OPT useful for their own
> > uses will hit this too, but it is far more likely to break things.
> > Thoughts?
> I'll be brutally honest: I don't like either one.
Don't for a minute think that I enjoy doing this - -fno-stack-protector
is a pain in the tuckus. But, its the world we live in, and if there is
one thing I've learned over the years, its that there will _always_ be
a "broken" distribution. Today it is Ubuntu, but Redhat/Fedora and SuSE have
had their moments in the sun too.
More information about the coreboot