release_33 branch patches

[Brad Smith]

On 29/08/13 3:59 PM, Tom Stellard wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:00:59PM -0400, Brad Smith wrote:
>> Here are some patches I'd like to propose being merged to the 3.3 branch..
>>
>> For LLVM..
>>
>> r183533 | rafael | 2013-06-07 12:35:57 -0400 (Fri, 07 Jun 2013) | 12 lines
>>
>> Support OpenBSD's native frame protection conventions.
>>
>> OpenBSD's stack smashing protection differs slightly from other
>> platforms:
>>
>>    1. The smash handler function is "__stack_smash_handler(const char
>>       *funcname)" instead of "__stack_chk_fail(void)".
>>
>>    2. There's a hidden "long __guard_local" object that gets linked
>>       into each executable and DSO.
>>
>> Patch by Matthew Dempsky.
>>
>
> I think this patch will break ABI compatibility, since it adds a new
> private member to the StackProtector class, so I don't think we can
> merge it as is.  Does this patch only affect OpenBSD?  If so, then my
> feeling is that it is OK with the ABI fixes, approval from the code owner,
> and a volunteer who is willing to test the 3.3.1 release on OpenBSD.

Yes, it only affects OpenBSD. I can test this.

>> For Clang..
>>
>> r183295 | rafael | 2013-06-05 00:28:55 -0400 (Wed, 05 Jun 2013) | 3 lines
>>
>> Default to PIE and using stack protection on OpenBSD.
>>
>> Patch by Matthew Dempsky.
>>
>
> I think the addition of the new option in Options.td will break the ABI,
> also it seems to me like a new feature, so I'm not sure if this should
> go in.  It would be good if the code owner or someone else could explain
> exactly why this patch is important.

I don't understand what you mean by breaking the ABI when it comes to 
adding a command line parameter for the compiler driver. This commit is 
coupled with the commit above fixing the stack protector support. 
Anyway, the idea was for the point release to fix the OpenBSD support so 
building from src didn't require patching to have a proper working compiler.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.