From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4113C10F29 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 14:49:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EFDE206EC for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 14:49:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=alien8.de header.i=@alien8.de header.b="oA4YhiHK" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726646AbgCQOtl (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2020 10:49:41 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:36778 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726189AbgCQOtl (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2020 10:49:41 -0400 Received: from zn.tnic (p200300EC2F0C9600080652A9D2B77226.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ec:2f0c:9600:806:52a9:d2b7:7226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.skyhub.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTPSA id E0FE11EC023E; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:49:39 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim; t=1584456580; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=tkKlfKN8wNeUINPgpvJm8j9GVsp+dcrzB7iyyg4e4UQ=; b=oA4YhiHKxAgrqVpJ7c9C5AIF3sfB7GX289kjBJjxoDxnM1DE3/ScEUnq8kOJ1oUC930rvz 48zTxN9XoZBvcES4G9LJHAC9VJfV/q59EbQ2dKuhwzaEO0QiTsVnVQBbJTRkGfx3YXg05o 34fla+jAy//k77iK088FoCTuYVkTbO8= Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:49:42 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: Jakub Jelinek Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Sergei Trofimovich , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Andy Lutomirski , x86@kernel.org, Michael Matz Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: fix early boot crash on gcc-10 Message-ID: <20200317144942.GE15609@zn.tnic> References: <20200314164451.346497-1-slyfox@gentoo.org> <20200316130414.GC12561@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20200316132648.GM2156@tucnak> <20200316134234.GE12561@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20200316175450.GO26126@zn.tnic> <20200316180303.GR2156@tucnak> <20200317143602.GC15609@zn.tnic> <20200317143914.GI2156@tucnak> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200317143914.GI2156@tucnak> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 03:39:14PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > That is because the option is called -fno-stack-protector, so one needs to > use __attribute__((optimize("no-stack-protector"))) Ha, that works even! :-) And my guest boots. I guess we can do that then. Looks like the optimal solution to me. Also, I'm assuming older gccs will simply ignore unknown optimize options? Thx. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette