[PATCH, BFD, LD, AArch64, 0/4] Add support for AArch64 BTI and PAC in the linker
Ramana Radhakrishnan
Ramana.Radhakrishnan@arm.com
Fri Mar 8 11:14:00 GMT 2019
On 08/03/2019 10:07, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Sudi,
>
>>> OK, so just to be clear, with --bti or --bti-nowarn the output will be
>>> given the BTI tag *even if* some of the input files do not have the BTI note ?
>
>> Yes
>
>> can go back and check the objects that need recompiling or use
>> --bti-nowarn when they are sure that even if there is any object with
>> missing BTI note section it is still safe to turn on BTI (or they still
>> want to turn on BTI). We think that these options would be most helpful
>> in early deployment.
>
> OK, well I get the --bti option then, but I still think that --bti-nowarn
> is a mistake. Given that --bti will only generate warnings if there are
> object files without the BTI note, and warnings can be ignored, I do not
> see the need for --bti-nowarn. Plus using --bti-nowarn could potentially
> cause problems if the developer forgets (or does not know) that it is
> enabled, and they end up thinking that they are creating BTI enabled
> binaries when in fact they are not.
Given this conversation, maybe renaming --bti to --force-bti would
express the intention clearer ?
regards
Ramana
>
> Cheers
> Nick
>
>
More information about the Binutils
mailing list