This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Avoid two SSP ABI's for AArch64.
- From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at arm dot com>, Venkataramanan Kumar <venkataramanan dot kumar at linaro dot org>
- Cc: Marcus Shawcroft <marcus dot shawcroft at linaro dot org>, Will Newton <will dot newton at linaro dot org>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 10:14:14 -0500
- Subject: Re: Avoid two SSP ABI's for AArch64.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <529CC927 dot 3040800 at redhat dot com> <CABXK9nejJW9EA7Y8edbt9ugC-Y5GvzSJpSBzLKpT7tkKfGqWuw at mail dot gmail dot com> <52A1ECBA dot 4090400 at redhat dot com> <52A1EDB5 dot 3040807 at arm dot com> <52A34409 dot 4060902 at redhat dot com> <52A596BB dot 3030803 at arm dot com>
On 12/09/2013 05:08 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> Thanks,
>
> I do not expect to need to change/add the alternative ABI interface, but
> knowing that it should be technically possible means I can go forward
> with what I believe today to be the correct decision with much more
> confidence.
>
> So on that basis I think we should stick with the default ABI -- ie
> using __stack_chk_guard.
Thank you. In that case we have consensus to use the existing ABI which
loads the stack guard from a symbol for stack smashing protection.
That means that Kumar need to drop his two patches for gcc and glibc.
I consider the glibc patch dropped (since I was the reviewer).
Cheers,
Carlos.