public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: "Magnus Damm" <magnus.damm@gmail.com>
Cc: "Magnus Damm" <magnus@valinux.co.jp>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Vivek Goyal" <vgoyal@in.ibm.com>,
	"Andi Kleen" <ak@muc.de>,
	fastboot@lists.osdl.org, Horms <horms@verge.net.au>,
	"Dave Anderson" <anderson@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/02] Elf: Align elf notes properly
Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2006 22:09:26 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1irhnnb09.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aec7e5c30611091952j6cd7988akc1671d269925bba9@mail.gmail.com> (Magnus Damm's message of "Fri, 10 Nov 2006 12:52:40 +0900")

"Magnus Damm" <magnus.damm@gmail.com> writes:

> I'm not sure you see all my points. The important parts are the
> offsets - offset 0 and offset N2 in the description above. The should
> be aligned somehow. Exactly how to align them depends on if the 64-bit
> spec is valid or not.
>
> My points are:
>
> - Some kdump code rounds up the size of "elf note header" today. This
> is unneccessary for 32 bit alignment and plain wrong for 64 bit
> alignment. So I think that the code is strange and should be changed
> regardless if the 64-bit spec is valid or not.

Sure that is reasonable, if correct.

> - Many implementations incorrectly calculate N2 as: roundup(sizeof(elf
> note header)) + roundup(n_namesz).

I am not certain that is incorrect.  roundup(sizeof(elf note header), 4) +
roundup(n_namesize, 4) will yield something that is properly 4 byte aligned.
I do agree that implementation is not correct for 8 byte alignment.  8 byte
alignment does not appear to be in widespread use in the wild.

> - You say that the size of the notes do not vary and therefore this is
> a non-issue. I agree that the size does not vary, but I believe that
> the aligment _is_ an issue. One example is the N2 calculation above,
> but more importantly the vmcore code that merges the elf note sections
> into one. You know, if you have more than one cpu you will end up with
> more than one crash note. And if you run Xen you will have even more
> crash notes.

Sure that is clearly an issue.

> - On top of this I think it would be nice if all this code could be
> unified to avoid code duplication. But we need to straighten out this
> and agree on how the aligment should work before the code can be
> merged into one implementation.

Sure.

To verify your claim that 8 byte alignment is correct I checked the
core dump code in fs/binfmt_elf.c in the linux kernel.  That always
uses 4 byte alignment.  Therefore it appears clear that only doing
4 byte alignment is not a local misreading of the spec, and is used in
other implementations.  If you can find an implementation that uses
8 byte alignment I am willing to consider it.

The current situation is that the linux kernel generated application
core dumps use 4 byte alignment so I expect that is what existing
applications such as gdb expect.

Therefore we use 4 byte alignment unless it can be shown that the
linux core dumps are a fluke and should be fixed.


Eric

  reply	other threads:[~2006-11-10  5:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-11-02 10:19 [PATCH 01/02] Elf: Always define elf_addr_t in linux/elf.h Magnus Damm
2006-11-02 10:19 ` [PATCH 02/02] Elf: Align elf notes properly Magnus Damm
2006-11-09 14:00   ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-11-10  0:50     ` Horms
2006-11-10  4:00       ` Magnus Damm
2006-11-10 23:37         ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-11-10 23:39           ` David Miller
2006-11-11  0:26             ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-11-11  0:43               ` David Miller
2006-11-11  1:20                 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-11-13  2:16                   ` Magnus Damm
2006-11-13  3:03                     ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-11-13  0:23                 ` Horms
2006-11-13  1:47                   ` David Miller
2006-11-10  3:52     ` Magnus Damm
2006-11-10  5:09       ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2006-11-10  6:53         ` Magnus Damm
2006-11-10 14:49           ` Vivek Goyal
2006-11-10 16:04             ` Dave Anderson
2006-11-10 16:10             ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-11-10 23:39         ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-11-02 10:43 ` [PATCH 01/02] Elf: Always define elf_addr_t in linux/elf.h Jakub Jelinek
2006-11-02 10:51   ` Magnus Damm

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=m1irhnnb09.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com \
    --to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=ak@muc.de \
    --cc=anderson@redhat.com \
    --cc=fastboot@lists.osdl.org \
    --cc=horms@verge.net.au \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=magnus.damm@gmail.com \
    --cc=magnus@valinux.co.jp \
    --cc=vgoyal@in.ibm.com \
    /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