From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50D8AC48BE8 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:32:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C42C2133F for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:32:07 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1561379527; bh=a3K3DY7Vl1R9i4uY3YJgDprYWQNpO5K3lg8iFltccQg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=zgF3Lc7P9CMyS9V6oyjy2AQl1zwiG0Ct/s7+9WFfHFt4D/UmakQwNLpIIZ9uBuKAq ZQ82u/dKm4V5yaNSbpmkmBMthGjFkxavTu1f7r+kzEKK5PstGLLoJdHmFCzisN0m2l W8CYU98am8QFL5ryYGU+hRUb9c7Yy79hG6oU2QFc= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730245AbfFXMcG (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jun 2019 08:32:06 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:43302 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726453AbfFXMcF (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jun 2019 08:32:05 -0400 Received: from linux-8ccs (nat.nue.novell.com [195.135.221.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5F2E8205C9; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:32:03 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1561379524; bh=a3K3DY7Vl1R9i4uY3YJgDprYWQNpO5K3lg8iFltccQg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=iLycqTq+aNbxd3gjPjNE9eolP7uheTaiE+2YXket8RcX0W8qyre9yJudYBufPfpKm jUvfAJJrJXmZeGmgaflV39AQzCx0zIiY52gWJ3gnVpF8VcEWbtYqYnKXHsBz1END0/ P3jMzy4V3tkHZRmIVZqd5LCLKdT6/vx5oRoZkvgM= Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 14:32:00 +0200 From: Jessica Yu To: Matthias Schiffer Cc: Russell King , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH modules v2 0/2] Fix handling of exit unwinding sections (on ARM) Message-ID: <20190624123200.GB22519@linux-8ccs> References: <20190607104912.6252-1-matthias.schiffer@ew.tq-group.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-OS: Linux linux-8ccs 5.1.0-rc1-lp150.12.28-default+ x86_64 User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org +++ Matthias Schiffer [21/06/19 14:35 +0200]: >On Fri, 2019-06-07 at 12:49 +0200, Matthias Schiffer wrote: >> For some time (050d18d1c651 "ARM: 8650/1: module: handle negative >> R_ARM_PREL31 addends correctly", v4.11+), building a kernel without >> CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD would lead to module loads failing on ARM >> systems with >> certain memory layouts, with messages like: >> >> imx_sdma: section 16 reloc 0 sym '': relocation 42 out of range >> (0x7f015260 -> 0xc0f5a5e8) >> >> (0x7f015260 is in the module load area, 0xc0f5a5e8 a regular vmalloc >> address; relocation 42 is R_ARM_PREL31) >> >> This is caused by relocatiosn in the .ARM.extab.exit.text and >> .ARM.exidx.exit.text sections referencing the .exit.text section. As >> the >> module loader will omit loading .exit.text without >> CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD, >> there will be relocations from loaded to unloaded sections; the >> resulting >> huge offsets trigger the sanity checks added in 050d18d1c651. >> >> IA64 might be affected by a similar issue - sections with names like >> .IA_64.unwind.exit.text and .IA_64.unwind_info.exit.text appear in >> the ld >> script - but I don't know much about that arch. >> >> Also, I'm not sure if this is stable-worthy - just enabling >> CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD should be a viable workaround on affected >> kernels. >> >> v2: Use __weak function as suggested by Jessica > >Hi Russell, > >this patch series is still waiting for your thoughts - in reponse to >v1, Jessica already offered to take it through her tree if you give >your Acked-by. > >Thanks, > >Matthias Hi Matthias, There doesn't seem to be any complaints and I think the patchset looks good, so I've taken it up the modules-next tree. Thanks! Jessica