From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2020 08:57:39 -0400 Subject: [PATCH v2 2/3] arm64: Bail out PIE builds early if load address is not 4K aligned In-Reply-To: <20200907095235.GA2954729@toto> References: <20200904090749.4067768-1-edgar.iglesias@gmail.com> <20200904090749.4067768-3-edgar.iglesias@gmail.com> <3196e201-a214-ebde-4ae4-35932d551ba0@wwwdotorg.org> <20200907095235.GA2954729@toto> Message-ID: <20200907125739.GL24856@bill-the-cat> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 11:52:35AM +0200, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote: > On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 12:43:57PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > > On 9/4/20 3:07 AM, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote: > > > From: "Edgar E. Iglesias" > > > > > > PIE requires a 4K aligned load address. If this is not met, trap > > > the startup sequence in a WFI loop rather than running into obscure > > > failures. > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/start.S b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/start.S > > > #if CONFIG_POSITION_INDEPENDENT > > > + /* Verify that we're 4K aligned. */ > > > > Similar to the comment on the previous patch: I believe the code that > > implements this check should be outside the #if check, since it's always > > needed. > > But a check for non-PIE would have to be stricter, wouldn't it? > I.e the load address needs to exactly match the link-time address. > > Perhaps we should add the non-PIE check in a separate patch (if at all)? If we can catch a bad configuration at link time in the non-PIE case (as said in another part of this thread I believe) then we should, yes, thanks! -- Tom -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 659 bytes Desc: not available URL: