* Namhyung Kim <namhy...@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Oct 2013 12:10:36 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > -ifeq ($(call try-cc,$(SOURCE_HELLO),$(CFLAGS) -Werror
> > -Wstack-protector,-Wstack-protector),y)
> > +ifeq ($(feature-stackprotector), 1)
> > CFLAGS += -Wstack-protector
> > endif
>
> [SNIP]
>
> > +test-stackprotector:
> > + $(BUILD) -Werror -fstack-protector
>
> The flag being checked should be -"W"stack-protector instead of
> -"f"stack-protector. And the gcc manpage says that -Wstack-protector is
> only active when -fstack-protector is active. So the end result should
> look like
>
> $(BUILD) -Werror -fstack-protector -Wstack-protector
So, I think this testcase only wanted to check whether GCC knows the
option or not, right?
Nevertheless I agree that we could add -Wstack-protector to be on the safe
side, I'll send a patch for that.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
