[cfe-dev] What do the different stack-protector levels protect in Clang?

[陳韋任 via cfe-dev]

Is this https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ClangCommandLineReference.html what you
are looking at?
Under the Clang source directory, `grep -r "stack-protector" docs/*` gives
the following result:

  docs/ClangCommandLineReference.rst:.. option:: -fstack-protector,
-fno-stack-protector
  docs/ClangCommandLineReference.rst:.. option:: -fstack-protector-all
  docs/ClangCommandLineReference.rst:.. option:: -fstack-protector-strong
  docs/DiagnosticsReference.rst:-Wstack-protector

​Or you can goole with "stack protector site:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/" to find something
on the cfe-dev mailing list. I think that's all you can find.

Regards,
chenwj
​


2017-04-28 1:20 GMT+08:00 Yaron Shragai via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
:

> Hello,
>
> I see documentation out there for the levels of stack-protector in GCC:
> Regular protects functions that have buffers or that use alloca(), all
> protects all functions, strong protects functions with the conditions
> listed in para 3 in this doc: https://docs.google.com/docume
> nt/d/1xXBH6rRZue4f296vGt9YQcuLVQHeE516stHwt8M9xyU/editAlso, in GCC,
> stack-protector puts variables below buffers on the stack (i.e., higher up
> the stack).
>
> I'm having trouble finding similar documentation for Clang. (Even if it's
> just an official statement that "Clang does the same thing as GCC.")
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
>


-- 
Wei-Ren Chen (陳韋任)
Homepage: https://people.cs.nctu.edu.tw/~chenwj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20170428/0d005bee/attachment.html>