Re: [PATCH 02/02] Elf: Align elf notes properly

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 11/10/06, Horms <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 07:00:22AM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Magnus Damm <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > elf: Align elf notes properly
> >
> > The kernel currently contains several elf note aligment implementations. Most
> > implementations follow the spec on 32-bit platforms, but none current aligns
> > the notes correctly on 64-bit platforms. This patch tries to fix this by
> > interpreting the 64-bit and 32-bit elf specs as the following:
> >
> > offset bytes name
> > 0      4     n_namesz -+                  -+
> > 4      4     n_descsz  | elf note header   |
> > 8      4     n_type   -+                   | elf note entry size - N4
> > 12     N1    name                          |
> > N2     N3    desc                         -+
> >
> > WS = word size in bytes (4 for 32 bit, 8 for 64 bit)
> > N1 = roundup(n_namesz + sizeof(elf note header), WS) - sizeof(elf note header)
> > N2 = sizeof(elf note header) + N1
> > N3 = roundup(n_descsz, WS)
> > N4 = sizeof(elf note header) + N1 + N2
> >
> > The elf note header contains three 32-bit values on 32-bit and 64-bit systems.
> > The header is followed by name and desc data together with padding. The
> > alignment and padding varies depending on the word size.
>
> I see your point and I disagree.  The notes in a kernel generated
> core dump do not vary in size.  Find me some implementation evidence that
> anyone ever added the extra 4 bytes of alignment to the description and the
> padding fields and I will be ready to consider this.  Currently this
> just appears to be reading a draft spec that doesn't match reality.

Or perhaps a spec that hasn't been implemented correctly.
I guess that the real question is, what padding is correct?

I see no point in aligning to 32-bit boundaries on 64-bit platforms.
Their intention was most likely to align to the word size IMO, so this
is most likely a "thinko" left over from whoever ported the code from
32-bit to 64-bit.

How we chose to align on 64-bit platforms is another issue, either we
fix it soon or live with the fact that we are not following the 64-bit
draft spec. Either way is fine with me.

/ magnus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux