From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH] arm64: ftrace: move ftrace-mod.o contents into linker script
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 13:47:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171120134722.GC2687@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKv+Gu-+Z+O=cTar9-K=PJjEZfzoYdYNiVYAxXM1_WwESfw9sg@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 01:39:50PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 20 November 2017 at 13:29, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote:
> > Thanks for this. Somebody ran across this internally a while back, but
> > it slipped through the cracks. I remember thinking at the time that the
> > Kconfig dependencies here looked a little weird too and perhaps
> > ARM64_MODULE_PLTS should be selected by RANDOMIZE_MODULE_REGION_FULL
> > instead of RANDOMIZE_BASE.
> >
>
> No. Even without RANDOMIZE_MODULE_REGION_FULL, the module region is
> shared with the vmalloc space if the kernel is randomized, and so
> other vmalloc allocations could eat into the module space as well.
Yes, you're right of course.
> > Anyhow, comments below.
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 01:15:38PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >> When building the arm64 kernel with bot CONFIG_ARM64_MODULE_PLTS and
> >> CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE enabled, the ftrace-mod.o object file is built
> >> with the kernel and contains a trampoline that is linked into each
> >> module, so that modules can be loaded far away from the kernel and
> >> still reach the ftrace entry point in the core kernel with an ordinary
> >> relative branch, as is emitted by the compiler instrumentation code
> >> dynamic ftrace relies on.
> >>
> >> In order to be able to build out of tree modules, this object file
> >> needs to be included into the linux-headers or linux-devel packages,
> >> which is undesirable, as it makes arm64 a special case (although a
> >> precedent does exist for 32-bit PPC).
> >
> > Agreed that we should avoid the object file, if possible.
> >
> >> Given that the trampoline only consists of two instructions, let's
> >> hack it into the module linker script instead.
> >
> > Why do we have to do this in the linker script? Couldn't we just generate
> > the .S file we currently use?
> >
>
> Not sure I am following you there. You mean adding a .S source file to
> each module target? Not sure how that would work.
Sorry, I mean something like generating the .S file from the Makefile,
compiling it and then linking the module against it.
Will
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-20 13:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-20 13:15 [RFC PATCH] arm64: ftrace: move ftrace-mod.o contents into linker script Ard Biesheuvel
2017-11-20 13:29 ` Will Deacon
2017-11-20 13:39 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-11-20 13:47 ` Will Deacon [this message]
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=20171120134722.GC2687@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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.