Re: [PATCH] [alpha] Add minimal support for software performanceevents.

[Ingo Molnar]

* Michael Cree <mcree@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > Should be done not by removing the stack-protector build 
> > unconditionally - but by auto-testing whether stackprotector is 
> > supported by GCC and using it if yes.
> 
> Revised patch attached.  It includes a test that the compiler doesn't 
> bomb out with -fstack-protector-all and only adds the option to CFLAGS 
> if ok.  But I have had to put the test below the definition of the 
> macro CC.  This has the side effect of separating the addition of 
> -fstack-protector-all from the main definitions of CFLAGS and 
> ALL_CFLAGS, and is not ideal in my opinion.  The patch also removes 
> -Wcast-align (I forgot to say that in the commit message of the 
> patch).

Nice, i'll queue this up for Linus.

Your S-O-B line was missing from this second patch - i presume you 
intended it to be included, right?

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-alpha" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html