From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Tue, 09 Mar 2004 04:09:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from p508B7B8E.dip.t-dialin.net ([IPv6:::ffff:80.139.123.142]:2061 "EHLO mail.linux-mips.net") by linux-mips.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 04:09:24 +0000 Received: from fluff.linux-mips.net (fluff.linux-mips.net [127.0.0.1]) by mail.linux-mips.net (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i2949Kex021207; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 05:09:20 +0100 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by fluff.linux-mips.net (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i2949JsX021206; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 05:09:19 +0100 Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 05:09:19 +0100 From: Ralf Baechle To: Kumba Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: 2.4 kernels + >=binutils-2.14.90.0.8 Message-ID: <20040309040919.GA11345@linux-mips.org> References: <404D0132.3020202@gentoo.org> <20040308234450.GF16163@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> <404D0A18.6050802@gentoo.org> <20040309003447.GH16163@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> <404D1909.1020005@gentoo.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <404D1909.1020005@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 4512 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 08:08:25PM -0500, Kumba wrote: > Hmm, well, The readelf -l and -S output from a 2.14.90.0.7-based > cross-compiler is attached, along with -l & -S outout from the > 2.15.90.0.1.1 (--version reports 2.15.90.0.1) as well for comparison. > > The PAX_FLAGS bit comes from a patch added in gentoo for PaX support in > binaries. More info on PaX is at http://pax.grsecurity.net. I'm going > to rebuild my kernel cross-compiler without that one patch and see what > the results are. PAX can't be fully supported on MIPS anyway; the architecture doesn't have a no-exec flag in it's pages. PAX docs are bullshit btw. execution proection doesn't require a split TLB and anyway, the MIPS uTLBs are split. Ralf