From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1753578AbXCPQqw@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753578AbXCPQqw (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 16 Mar 2007 12:46:52 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965610AbXCPQqw
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Fri, 16 Mar 2007 12:46:52 -0400
Received: from gw.goop.org ([64.81.55.164]:55713 "EHLO mail.goop.org"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753578AbXCPQqv (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 16 Mar 2007 12:46:51 -0400
Message-ID: <45FAC9FB.6070800@goop.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 09:46:51 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>
CC: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
       Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@lists.osdl.org>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
       Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
       Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH] Fixup COMPAT_VDSO to work with	CONFIG_PARAVIRT
References: <45FA054F.6020107@vmware.com> <45FA0D13.6080601@goop.org> <45FA16FE.7010805@vmware.com> <45FA26DA.7020109@goop.org> <45FA5E7B.76E4.0078.0@novell.com>
In-Reply-To: <45FA5E7B.76E4.0078.0@novell.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Jan Beulich wrote:
> I have one, too (which is one reasone why I created the original Xen patch).
>   

It's some version of SuSE 9, right?  What glibc version?

>>> I'm playing safe.  Binary identical relocation to 0xffffe000 was my goal.
>>>       
>> Yeah, fair enough.  But as Eric likes to keep pointing out, an
>> executable ELF file need not have any sections at all, so the only safe
>> course for anything "real" is via the section headers.
>>     
>
> Program headers you mean.
>   

Er, yep.

>> So I guess the right thing to do is relocate the dynamic stuff via
>> PT_DYNAMIC, and relocate the symtab if its present.
>>     
>
> Symtab should also be deduced from program headers.
>   

Well, the normal symtab might be completely missing.  But yes, the
dynamic symtab should be in the PT_DYNAMIC.

    J