[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 04:29:26 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Cc: linux-kbuild <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>, Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Ulf Magnusson <ulfalizer@...il.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
"Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>, Nicolas Pitre <nico@...aro.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, Emese Revfy <re.emese@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 17/21] gcc-plugins: always build plugins with C++
On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 10:29 PM, Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> wrote:
> If the target compiler is GCC 4.8 or newer, plugins are compiled with
> HOSTCXX. Otherwise, gcc-plugin.sh will select HOSTCC or HOSTCXX.
>
> To simplify things, drop the HOSTCC support for plugins. If you use
> GCC plugins, the requirement for the target compiler is GCC 4.8 (or
> older compiler with necessary features backported). This is a feature
> for advanced users, so this requirement would not be a big deal.
> Currently, building plugins requires GCC 4.5, so this is not a big jump.
Emese already NAKed this, and I'd agree. 4.5 to 4.8 is quite a jump
(see all the threads on minimum gcc versions). Until we're at 4.8 as a
minimum, let's leave this as-is. "To simply things" doesn't seem like
a good enough reason to me.
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
