From: schwab@suse.de (Andreas Schwab)
To: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] RISC-V: Handle R_RISCV_32 in modules
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 09:54:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mvm8t7liwrr.fsf@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mhng-3f91f2da-55ae-41b8-b5b2-956ea638bed0@palmer-si-x1c4> (Palmer Dabbelt's message of "Fri, 08 Jun 2018 15:33:35 -0700 (PDT)")
On Jun 08 2018, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Jun 2018 03:27:27 PDT (-0700), schwab at suse.de wrote:
>> With CONFIG_MODVERSIONS=y the R_RISCV_32 relocation is used by the
>> __kcrctab section.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
>> ---
>> arch/riscv/kernel/module.c | 12 ++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/module.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/module.c
>> index 5dddba301d..1d5e9b934b 100644
>> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/module.c
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/module.c
>> @@ -17,6 +17,17 @@
>> #include <linux/errno.h>
>> #include <linux/moduleloader.h>
>>
>> +static int apply_r_riscv_32_rela(struct module *me, u32 *location, Elf_Addr v)
>> +{
>> + if (v != (u32)v) {
>
> My worry with this kind of check is that it relies on some sort of
> undefined behavior in C and that at some point in the future GCC will just
> go decide the check can never fail. I checked and GCC doesn't elide these
> checks now, so I might be wrong.
>
> Is this defined to do what it looks like it's doing?
This is unsigned arithmetic, thus fully defined.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab at suse.de
GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7
"And now for something completely different."
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
To: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>
Cc: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Handle R_RISCV_32 in modules
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 09:54:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mvm8t7liwrr.fsf@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mhng-3f91f2da-55ae-41b8-b5b2-956ea638bed0@palmer-si-x1c4> (Palmer Dabbelt's message of "Fri, 08 Jun 2018 15:33:35 -0700 (PDT)")
On Jun 08 2018, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Jun 2018 03:27:27 PDT (-0700), schwab@suse.de wrote:
>> With CONFIG_MODVERSIONS=y the R_RISCV_32 relocation is used by the
>> __kcrctab section.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
>> ---
>> arch/riscv/kernel/module.c | 12 ++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/module.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/module.c
>> index 5dddba301d..1d5e9b934b 100644
>> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/module.c
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/module.c
>> @@ -17,6 +17,17 @@
>> #include <linux/errno.h>
>> #include <linux/moduleloader.h>
>>
>> +static int apply_r_riscv_32_rela(struct module *me, u32 *location, Elf_Addr v)
>> +{
>> + if (v != (u32)v) {
>
> My worry with this kind of check is that it relies on some sort of
> undefined behavior in C and that at some point in the future GCC will just
> go decide the check can never fail. I checked and GCC doesn't elide these
> checks now, so I might be wrong.
>
> Is this defined to do what it looks like it's doing?
This is unsigned arithmetic, thus fully defined.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7
"And now for something completely different."
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-11 7:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-07 10:27 [PATCH] RISC-V: Handle R_RISCV_32 in modules Andreas Schwab
2018-06-07 10:27 ` Andreas Schwab
2018-06-08 22:33 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2018-06-08 22:33 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2018-06-11 7:54 ` Andreas Schwab [this message]
2018-06-11 7:54 ` Andreas Schwab
2018-06-11 20:53 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2018-06-11 20:53 ` Palmer Dabbelt
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=mvm8t7liwrr.fsf@suse.de \
--to=schwab@suse.de \
--cc=linux-riscv@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.