Re: [PATCH v2] efi: Fix stack protector issues

From: Glenn Washburn <development@efficientek.com>
To: "Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko" <phcoder@gmail.com>
Cc: The development of GNU GRUB <grub-devel@gnu.org>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Kiper <dkiper@net-space.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] efi: Fix stack protector issues
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 15:29:47 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240229152947.2232d8b1@crass-HP-ZBook-15-G2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEaD8JNxBZXw+reQUCatLRbRdtY6GdGB4bKfd1AS=MJdXi4U0w@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 06:10:29 +0300
"Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko" <phcoder@gmail.com> wrote:

> Looks good. A small comment inline
> 
> > diff --git a/grub-core/kern/main.c b/grub-core/kern/main.c
> > index 731c07c29..5db504e6e 100644
> > --- a/grub-core/kern/main.c
> > +++ b/grub-core/kern/main.c
> > @@ -265,6 +265,11 @@ reclaim_module_space (void)
> >  void __attribute__ ((noreturn))
> >  grub_main (void)
> >  {
> > +#ifdef GRUB_STACK_PROTECTOR
> > +  /* This call can only be made from a function that does not return. */
> Please add a bit of reasoning here not just in the commit message

I suspect Ard didn't see this as he wasn't CC'd. It would be good to
get this patch in (so I can rebase some old series and submit them to
the list). Daniel would you accept this as is? Or Ard can you update
the comment in this patch? My preference is for adding details to the
comment, but as my review suggests I'm fine with it as is.

Glenn

_______________________________________________
Grub-devel mailing list
Grub-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel