* Dave Martin: > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:00:35AM -0700, Yu-cheng Yu wrote: >> On Tue, 2019-06-18 at 18:05 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: >> > * Yu-cheng Yu: >> > >> > > > I assumed that it would also parse the main executable and make >> > > > adjustments based on that. >> > > >> > > Yes, Linux also looks at the main executable's header, but not its >> > > NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 if there is a loader. >> > > >> > > > >> > > > ld.so can certainly provide whatever the kernel needs. We need to tweak >> > > > the existing loader anyway. >> > > > >> > > > No valid statically-linked binaries exist today, so this is not a >> > > > consideration at this point. >> > > >> > > So from kernel, we look at only PT_GNU_PROPERTY? >> > >> > If you don't parse notes/segments in the executable for CET, then yes. >> > We can put PT_GNU_PROPERTY into the loader. >> >> Thanks! > > Would this require the kernel and ld.so to be updated in a particular > order to avoid breakage? I don't know enough about RHEL to know how > controversial that might be. There is no official ld.so that will work with the current userspace interface (in this patch submission). Upstream glibc needs to be updated anyway, so yet another change isn't much of an issue. This is not a problem; we knew that something like this might happen. Sure, people need a new binutils with backports for PT_GNU_PROPERTY, but given that only very few people will build CET binaries with older binutils, I think that's not a real issue either. Thanks, Florian
