linux-sh.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>
To: linux-sh@vger.kernel.org
Subject: SH FDPIC ABI spec/binutils and kernel conflict on flag definitions
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 03:34:00 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150910033400.GM17773@brightrain.aerifal.cx> (raw)

In the ELF Header part of the SH FDPIC ABI document, it's stated that
EF_SH_FDPIC|EF_SH_PIC means each LOAD segment can be independently
positioned, while EF_SH_FDPIC by itself (without EF_SH_PIC) means the
relative position of LOAD segments with respect to each other is fixed
(like in normal ELF usage). This seems to match what binutils outputs.

However the kernel contains the code (arch/sh/include/asm/elf.h):

#define elf_check_const_displacement(x) ((x)->e_flags & EF_SH_PIC)

and (fs/binfmt_elf_fdpic.c):

	if (elf_check_const_displacement(&exec_params.hdr))
		exec_params.flags |= ELF_FDPIC_FLAG_CONSTDISP;

which does exactly the opposite: the presence of the EF_SH_PIC flag,
rather than absence of it, causes the kernel to treat the binary as
one requiring "constant displacement" between LOAD segments.

If my analysis is correct, how should this be fixed? It seems to me
the kernel is clearly wrong, but it might also be considered the de
facto ABI. Is there any way forward that allows fixing this bug (which
defeats the whole purpose of FDPIC) without breaking existing usage?
Or is there no existing usage to care about?

Rich

             reply	other threads:[~2015-09-10  3:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-09-10  3:34 Rich Felker [this message]
2015-09-10 11:57 ` SH FDPIC ABI spec/binutils and kernel conflict on flag definitions Nick Clifton
2015-09-10 14:58 ` Rich Felker
2015-09-10 15:45 ` David Howells
2015-09-10 15:50 ` Rich Felker
2015-09-10 15:53 ` David Howells
2015-09-10 16:01 ` Rich Felker
2015-09-10 21:09 ` Rich Felker
2015-09-14 16:09 ` Rich Felker
2015-12-30  3:55 ` Mike Frysinger

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=20150910033400.GM17773@brightrain.aerifal.cx \
    --to=dalias@libc.org \
    --cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).