[fedora-arm] Fedora 28 will not have stack clash protection on armhfp

[Florian Weimer]

Due to bug 1522678, we will not be able to enable
-fstack-clash-protection on armhfp.

This is unfortunate, but I don't think the lack of upstream support on
armhfp should block this feature for all other architectures (including
aarch64).

Thanks,
Florian
_______________________________________________
arm mailing list -- ***@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to arm

[Peter Robinson]

Due to bug 1522678, we will not be able to enable -fstack-clash-protection
on armhfp.

Is there an upstream bug report/thread for this? It would be useful to
at least make the appropriate ARM maintainers aware of the problem so
if they're interested enough or see value in it they can deal with it
and then it can be enabled later.

Can you please also make sure any arm specific bugs are linked against
ARMTracker, I can't escalate unknown issues to contacts I have with in
relevant organisations if I don't know they exist, and it's impossible
to track all bugs.

This is unfortunate, but I don't think the lack of upstream support on
armhfp should block this feature for all other architectures (including
aarch64).

I think that's a reasonable compromise, if/when it gets fixed upstream
we can always enable it then and it'll get applied with the next mass
rebuild.

Peter
_______________________________________________
arm mailing list -- ***@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to arm-***@lists.fedoraprojec

[Florian Weimer]

Post by Peter Robinson

Due to bug 1522678, we will not be able to enable -fstack-clash-protection
on armhfp.

Is there an upstream bug report/thread for this? It would be useful to
at least make the appropriate ARM maintainers aware of the problem so
if they're interested enough or see value in it they can deal with it
and then it can be enabled later.

Nobody has written a patch, so 32-bit ARM uses the generic bits, which
are suboptimal (in terms of ABI compliance and protection level) and, it
appears, not really usable.

Even the final aarch64 bits are still pending review by the ARM maintainers.

Post by Peter Robinson
Can you please also make sure any arm specific bugs are linked against
ARMTracker, I can't escalate unknown issues to contacts I have with in
relevant organisations if I don't know they exist, and it's impossible
to track all bugs.

Okay, I will do that in the future.

Thanks,
Florian
_______________________________________________
arm mailing list -- ***@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to arm-***@lists.fedoraproj

[Florian Weimer]

Post by Florian Weimer

Post by Peter Robinson

Post by Florian Weimer
Due to bug 1522678, we will not be able to enable
-fstack-clash-protection
on armhfp.

Is there an upstream bug report/thread for this? It would be useful to
at least make the appropriate ARM maintainers aware of the problem so
if they're interested enough or see value in it they can deal with it
and then it can be enabled later.

Nobody has written a patch, so 32-bit ARM uses the generic bits, which
are suboptimal (in terms of ABI compliance and protection level) and, it
appears, not really usable.
Even the final aarch64 bits are still pending review by the ARM maintainers.

The aarch64 bits still have not been committed. It might help if you
pinged your Arm contacts again.

Thanks,
Florian
_______________________________________________
arm mailing list -- ***@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to arm-lea