From: sdu.liu@huawei.com (Liu hua)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RESEND PATCH] ARM: kdump: Add vmcore_elf64_check_arch
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 21:21:20 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5395B4D0.6040302@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140506121558.GB30234@arm.com>
? 2014/5/6 20:15, Will Deacon ??:
> On Sat, May 03, 2014 at 02:44:46PM +0100, Liu Hua wrote:
>> Hi Will or Russell,
>
> Hello,
>
>> With CONFIG_LPAE=y, memory in 32-bit ARM systems can exceed
>> 4G. So if we use kdump in such systems. The capture kernel
>> should parse 64-bit elf header(parse_crash_elf64_headers).
>>
>> And this process can not pass because ARM linux only provides
>> zero vmcore_elf64_check_arch function by commit 4b3bf7aef.
>>
>> This patch adds check functions related to elf64 header.
>
> [...]
>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/elf.c b/arch/arm/kernel/elf.c
>> index d0d1e83..452086a 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/elf.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/elf.c
>> @@ -38,6 +38,39 @@ int elf_check_arch(const struct elf32_hdr *x)
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(elf_check_arch);
>>
>> +int elf_check_arch_64(const struct elf64_hdr *x)
>> +{
>> + unsigned int eflags;
>> +
>> + /* Make sure it's an ARM executable */
>> + if (x->e_machine != EM_ARM)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + /* Make sure the entry address is reasonable */
>> + if (x->e_entry & 1) {
>> + if (!(elf_hwcap & HWCAP_THUMB))
>> + return 0;
>> + } else if (x->e_entry & 3)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + eflags = x->e_flags;
>> + if ((eflags & EF_ARM_EABI_MASK) == EF_ARM_EABI_UNKNOWN) {
>> + unsigned int flt_fmt;
>> +
>> + /* APCS26 is only allowed if the CPU supports it */
>> + if ((eflags & EF_ARM_APCS_26) && !(elf_hwcap & HWCAP_26BIT))
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + flt_fmt = eflags & (EF_ARM_VFP_FLOAT | EF_ARM_SOFT_FLOAT);
>> +
>> + /* VFP requires the supporting code */
>> + if (flt_fmt == EF_ARM_VFP_FLOAT && !(elf_hwcap & HWCAP_VFP))
>> + return 0;
>> + }
>> + return 1;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(elf_check_arch_64);
>
Hi Will,
Sorry to reply you so late. These days I am working on kdump feature for LPAE enabled
kernel. And now I think this patch is not good.
> This function looks identical to elf_check_arch. Why do we need to duplicate
> that code? You could use some pre-processor magic to make the core part of
> the functions agnostic to header type.
At the begging I think I should add elf_check_arch_64 just as elf_check_arch to
do complicated check.
But for ARM32, elf_check_arch_64 would not be used except for kdump. No programs
with elf64 header can be loaded into 32bit ARM kernel. So I think I can just check
the "e_machine", just as what other platform does. I think other checks is useless
for kdump.
> In fact, if elf_check_arch could handle both header types then the generic
> definition of vmcore_elf64_check_arch in include/linux/crash_dump.h would
> work out of the box.
As I mentioned, I afraid this will make the code hard to understand.( Sorry
for my former incorrect patch).
How about this patch?
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/elf.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/elf.h
index f4b46d3..9424542 100644
--- a/arch/arm/include/asm/elf.h
+++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/elf.h
@@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ struct elf32_hdr;
extern int elf_check_arch(const struct elf32_hdr *);
#define elf_check_arch elf_check_arch
-#define vmcore_elf64_check_arch(x) (0)
+#define vmcore_elf64_check_arch(x) ((x)->e_machine == EM_ARM)
extern int arm_elf_read_implies_exec(const struct elf32_hdr *, int);
#define elf_read_implies_exec(ex,stk) arm_elf_read_implies_exec(&(ex), stk)
Thanks,
Liu Hua
> Will
>
> .
>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Liu hua <sdu.liu@huawei.com>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: "linux@arm.linux.org.uk" <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
"wangnan0@huawei.com" <wangnan0@huawei.com>,
"peifeiyue@huawei.com" <peifeiyue@huawei.com>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
"mika.westerberg@iki.fi" <mika.westerberg@iki.fi>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"alonid@stratoscale.com" <alonid@stratoscale.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH] ARM: kdump: Add vmcore_elf64_check_arch
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 21:21:20 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5395B4D0.6040302@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140506121558.GB30234@arm.com>
于 2014/5/6 20:15, Will Deacon 写道:
> On Sat, May 03, 2014 at 02:44:46PM +0100, Liu Hua wrote:
>> Hi Will or Russell,
>
> Hello,
>
>> With CONFIG_LPAE=y, memory in 32-bit ARM systems can exceed
>> 4G. So if we use kdump in such systems. The capture kernel
>> should parse 64-bit elf header(parse_crash_elf64_headers).
>>
>> And this process can not pass because ARM linux only provides
>> zero vmcore_elf64_check_arch function by commit 4b3bf7aef.
>>
>> This patch adds check functions related to elf64 header.
>
> [...]
>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/elf.c b/arch/arm/kernel/elf.c
>> index d0d1e83..452086a 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/elf.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/elf.c
>> @@ -38,6 +38,39 @@ int elf_check_arch(const struct elf32_hdr *x)
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(elf_check_arch);
>>
>> +int elf_check_arch_64(const struct elf64_hdr *x)
>> +{
>> + unsigned int eflags;
>> +
>> + /* Make sure it's an ARM executable */
>> + if (x->e_machine != EM_ARM)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + /* Make sure the entry address is reasonable */
>> + if (x->e_entry & 1) {
>> + if (!(elf_hwcap & HWCAP_THUMB))
>> + return 0;
>> + } else if (x->e_entry & 3)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + eflags = x->e_flags;
>> + if ((eflags & EF_ARM_EABI_MASK) == EF_ARM_EABI_UNKNOWN) {
>> + unsigned int flt_fmt;
>> +
>> + /* APCS26 is only allowed if the CPU supports it */
>> + if ((eflags & EF_ARM_APCS_26) && !(elf_hwcap & HWCAP_26BIT))
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + flt_fmt = eflags & (EF_ARM_VFP_FLOAT | EF_ARM_SOFT_FLOAT);
>> +
>> + /* VFP requires the supporting code */
>> + if (flt_fmt == EF_ARM_VFP_FLOAT && !(elf_hwcap & HWCAP_VFP))
>> + return 0;
>> + }
>> + return 1;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(elf_check_arch_64);
>
Hi Will,
Sorry to reply you so late. These days I am working on kdump feature for LPAE enabled
kernel. And now I think this patch is not good.
> This function looks identical to elf_check_arch. Why do we need to duplicate
> that code? You could use some pre-processor magic to make the core part of
> the functions agnostic to header type.
At the begging I think I should add elf_check_arch_64 just as elf_check_arch to
do complicated check.
But for ARM32, elf_check_arch_64 would not be used except for kdump. No programs
with elf64 header can be loaded into 32bit ARM kernel. So I think I can just check
the "e_machine", just as what other platform does. I think other checks is useless
for kdump.
> In fact, if elf_check_arch could handle both header types then the generic
> definition of vmcore_elf64_check_arch in include/linux/crash_dump.h would
> work out of the box.
As I mentioned, I afraid this will make the code hard to understand.( Sorry
for my former incorrect patch).
How about this patch?
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/elf.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/elf.h
index f4b46d3..9424542 100644
--- a/arch/arm/include/asm/elf.h
+++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/elf.h
@@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ struct elf32_hdr;
extern int elf_check_arch(const struct elf32_hdr *);
#define elf_check_arch elf_check_arch
-#define vmcore_elf64_check_arch(x) (0)
+#define vmcore_elf64_check_arch(x) ((x)->e_machine == EM_ARM)
extern int arm_elf_read_implies_exec(const struct elf32_hdr *, int);
#define elf_read_implies_exec(ex,stk) arm_elf_read_implies_exec(&(ex), stk)
Thanks,
Liu Hua
> Will
>
> .
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-09 13:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-03 13:44 [RESEND PATCH] ARM: kdump: Add vmcore_elf64_check_arch Liu Hua
2014-05-03 13:44 ` Liu Hua
2014-05-06 12:15 ` Will Deacon
2014-05-06 12:15 ` Will Deacon
2014-06-09 13:21 ` Liu hua [this message]
2014-06-09 13:21 ` Liu hua
2014-06-16 13:38 ` Will Deacon
2014-06-16 13:38 ` Will Deacon
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=5395B4D0.6040302@huawei.com \
--to=sdu.liu@huawei.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.