Re: [PATCH v5 23/36] arm/build: Explicitly keep .ARM.attributes sections

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

 



On 2020-08-03, 'Nick Desaulniers' via Clang Built Linux wrote:
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 4:18 PM Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In preparation for adding --orphan-handling=warn, explicitly keep the
.ARM.attributes section by expanding the existing ELF_DETAILS macro into
ARM_DETAILS.

Suggested-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@xxxxxxxxxx>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAKwvOdk-racgq5pxsoGS6Vtifbtrk5fmkmnoLxrQMaOvV0nPWw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
 arch/arm/include/asm/vmlinux.lds.h | 4 ++++
 arch/arm/kernel/vmlinux-xip.lds.S  | 2 +-
 arch/arm/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S      | 2 +-
 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/vmlinux.lds.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/vmlinux.lds.h
index a08f4301b718..c4af5182ab48 100644
--- a/arch/arm/include/asm/vmlinux.lds.h
+++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/vmlinux.lds.h
@@ -52,6 +52,10 @@
                ARM_MMU_DISCARD(*(__ex_table))                          \
                COMMON_DISCARDS

+#define ARM_DETAILS                                                    \
+               ELF_DETAILS                                             \
+               .ARM.attributes 0 : { *(.ARM.attributes) }

I had to look up what the `0` meant:
https://sourceware.org/binutils/docs/ld/Output-Section-Attributes.html#Output-Section-Attributes
mentions it's an "address" and
https://ftp.gnu.org/old-gnu/Manuals/ld-2.9.1/html_chapter/ld_3.html#SEC21
mentions it as "start" (an address).
Unless we need those, can we drop them? (Sorry for the resulting churn
that would cause).  I think the NO_LOAD stuff makes more sense, but
I'm curious if the kernel checks for that.

NOLOAD means SHT_NOBITS (usually SHF_ALLOC). .ARM.attributes is a
non-SHF_ALLOC section.

An explicit 0 (output section address) is good - GNU ld's internal
linker scripts (ld --verbose output) use 0 for such non-SHF_ALLOC sections.
Without the 0, the section may get a non-zero address, which is not
wrong - but probably does not look well. See https://reviews.llvm.org/D85867 for details.


Reviewed-by: Fangrui Song <maskray@xxxxxxxxxx>

+
 #define ARM_STUBS_TEXT                                                 \
                *(.gnu.warning)                                         \
                *(.glue_7)                                              \
diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/vmlinux-xip.lds.S b/arch/arm/kernel/vmlinux-xip.lds.S
index 904c31fa20ed..57fcbf55f913 100644
--- a/arch/arm/kernel/vmlinux-xip.lds.S
+++ b/arch/arm/kernel/vmlinux-xip.lds.S
@@ -150,7 +150,7 @@ SECTIONS
        _end = .;

        STABS_DEBUG
-       ELF_DETAILS
+       ARM_DETAILS
 }

 /*
diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S b/arch/arm/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S
index bb950c896a67..1d3d3b599635 100644
--- a/arch/arm/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S
+++ b/arch/arm/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S
@@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ SECTIONS
        _end = .;

        STABS_DEBUG
-       ELF_DETAILS
+       ARM_DETAILS
 }

 #ifdef CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX
--
2.25.1




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Newbies]     [x86 Platform Driver]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux