From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933137Ab3LIVyJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Dec 2013 16:54:09 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:37083 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933065Ab3LIVyF (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Dec 2013 16:54:05 -0500 Message-ID: <52A63BF3.1000608@zytor.com> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 13:53:55 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "H.J. Lu" CC: Jiri Kosina , LKML , Josh Boyer Subject: Re: [PATCH] binfmt_elf: fix PIE load with randomization disabled References: <52A63AD4.2030101@zytor.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/09/2013 01:52 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >> Why is that? It would seem to be a big difference between a relocatable >> binary (PIE) and one with a load address fixed at link time. >> > > PIE with non-zero vaddr should be loaded at non-zero > vaddr. Otherwise, PIE may not work as expected. > Please explain why that is the case, as it seems to be implying that PIE isn't actually relocatable in that case... -hpa