All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>
To: The development of GRUB 2 <grub-devel@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: ELF bugfixes
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 23:46:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090313224629.GA781@thorin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49BAC506.2030006@gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 09:41:42PM +0100, phcoder wrote:
> Robert Millan wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 10:21:41PM +0100, phcoder wrote:
>>> Robert Millan wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 01:35:06AM +0100, phcoder wrote:
>>>>> +	* include/grub/elf.h: added missing attributes
>>>> This should be a bit more descriptive.
>>>>
>>>>>    for (i = 0; i < ehdr->e_phnum; i++)
>>>>>      if (phdr(i)->p_type == PT_LOAD && phdr(i)->p_filesz != 0)
>>>>>        {
>>>>> -	if (phdr(i)->p_paddr < phdr(lowest_segment)->p_paddr)
>>>>> +	if (lowest_segment == -1 +	    || phdr(i)->p_paddr <  
>>>>> phdr(lowest_segment)->p_paddr)
>>>>>  	  lowest_segment = i;
>>>>> -	if (phdr(i)->p_paddr > phdr(highest_segment)->p_paddr)
>>>>> +	if (highest_segment == -1
>>>>> +	    || phdr(i)->p_paddr > phdr(highest_segment)->p_paddr)
>>>>>  	  highest_segment = i;
>>>>>        }
>>>> Why?
>>> Because if first segment doesn't have the PT_LOAD attribute set then 
>>> it  should be considered in this comparison
>>
>> But you didn't remove the PT_LOAD check.  And in the routine below that
>> does the actual segment load, we still check for PT_LOAD.  Those should be
>> consistent, right?
>>
>
> No I expressed myself badly. Original code assumed that first segment  
> has PT_LOAD always set (lowest_segment is 0 initally). I removed this  
> assumption

Why do we care about non-PT_LOAD segments?

>>>>> -  grub_multiboot_payload_entry_offset = ehdr->e_entry - phdr(lowest_segment)->p_vaddr;
>>>>> +  grub_multiboot_payload_entry_offset = ehdr->e_entry - phdr(lowest_segment)->p_paddr;
>>>> Are you sure about this?  IIRC e_entry is in the virtual address space.  I
>>>> think we had some trouble with this (with NetBSD?), which lead to the current
>>>> use of p_vaddr in this line.
>>>>
>>> Actually now thinking I see that the problem is more deep. The 
>>> section  which is loaded at the lowest address isn't necessarily the 
>>> section  which contains entry point. I'll fix this part cleanly and 
>>> will resubmit  the patch
>>
>> No, but AFAICT the entry point is defined relative to that address, regardless
>> of which segment contains it.
>>
> Actually our segment table is also our table for transforming between  
> virtual and physical address. I don't see why entry point would be  
> defined against virtual address of lowest physical segement

I think entry point is supposed to be defined in virtual address space.  As
to why do we check for physical addresses earlier, I'm not entirely sure.  I
think the idea was that we store the entry point as an offset, so that it
can be applied to physical addresses, despite the fact that we obtained it
by comparing e_entry with a virtual address.

ISTR this being an issue for NetBSD.  We should be certain what we do before
changing it.  In particular, the following commit seem relevant:

2008-02-05  Bean  <bean123ch@gmail.com>

        * loader/i386/pc/multiboot.c (grub_multiboot_load_elf32): Get physical
        address of entry.

I'd also recommend testing your changes with NetBSD's kernel.

-- 
Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."



  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-03-13 22:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-03-02  0:35 ELF bugfixes phcoder
2009-03-11 21:15 ` Robert Millan
2009-03-11 21:21   ` phcoder
2009-03-12  8:23     ` phcoder
2009-03-12  9:07       ` David Miller
2009-03-13 19:14     ` Robert Millan
2009-03-13 20:41       ` phcoder
2009-03-13 20:45         ` David Miller
2009-03-13 20:52           ` phcoder
2009-03-18 10:12             ` Robert Millan
2009-03-18 13:26               ` phcoder
2009-03-21 17:46                 ` Robert Millan
2009-03-21 17:58                   ` phcoder
2009-03-21 18:03                     ` Robert Millan
2009-03-21 18:05                       ` phcoder
2009-03-21 22:03                         ` Robert Millan
2009-03-21 22:49                           ` phcoder
2009-03-21 23:02                             ` Robert Millan
2009-03-21 22:55                           ` Robert Millan
2009-03-13 22:46         ` Robert Millan [this message]
2009-03-13 23:01           ` phcoder
2009-03-14 14:53             ` Robert Millan
2009-03-15 21:30           ` phcoder
     [not found] <49B8F067.2040503@gmail.com>
     [not found] ` <20090312.055819.95768237.davem@davemloft.net>
     [not found]   ` <49B90C69.60703@gmail.com>
     [not found]     ` <20090312.062628.260166400.davem@davemloft.net>
2009-03-12 13:43       ` phcoder
2009-03-12 14:05         ` David Miller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20090313224629.GA781@thorin \
    --to=rmh@aybabtu.com \
    --cc=grub-devel@gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.