On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 4:23 AM Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 06:51:44PM +0100, Michal Suchánek wrote: > >Hello, > > > >On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 06:18:41PM +0000, Gary Guo wrote: > >> On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 14:40:59 -0700 > >> Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> > On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 04:11:51PM +0000, Gary Guo wrote: > >> > > > >> > > struct modversion_info { > >> > >- unsigned long crc; > >> > >- char name[MODULE_NAME_LEN]; > >> > >+ /* Offset of the next modversion entry in relation to this one. */ > >> > >+ u32 next; > >> > >+ u32 crc; > >> > >+ char name[0]; > >> > > >> > although not really exported as uapi, this will break userspace as this is > >> > used in the elf file generated for the modules. I think > >> > this change must be made in a backward compatible way and kmod updated > >> > to deal with the variable name length: > >> > > >> > kmod $ git grep "\[64" > >> > libkmod/libkmod-elf.c: char name[64 - sizeof(uint32_t)]; > >> > libkmod/libkmod-elf.c: char name[64 - sizeof(uint64_t)]; > >> > > >> > in kmod we have both 32 and 64 because a 64-bit kmod can read both 32 > >> > and 64 bit module, and vice versa. > >> > > >> > >> Hi Lucas, > >> > >> Thanks for the information. > >> > >> The change can't be "truly" backward compatible, in a sense that > >> regardless of the new format we choose, kmod would not be able to decode > >> symbols longer than "64 - sizeof(long)" bytes. So the list it retrieves > >> is going to be incomplete, isn't it? > >> > >> What kind of backward compatibility should be expected? It could be: > >> * short symbols can still be found by old versions of kmod, but not > >> long symbols; > > > >That sounds good. Not everyone is using rust, and with this option > >people who do will need to upgrade tooling, and people who don't care > >don't need to do anything. > > that could be it indeed. My main worry here is: > > "After the support is added in kmod, kmod needs to be able to output the > correct information regardless if the module is from before/after the > change in the kernel and also without relying on kernel version." > Just changing the struct modversion_info doesn't make that possible. > > Maybe adding the long symbols in another section? Or ble > just increase to 512 and add the size to a > "__versions_hdr" section. If we then output a max size per module, > this would offset a little bit the additional size gained for the > modules using rust. And the additional 0's should compress well > so I'm not sure the additional size is that much relevant here. I also thought of new section(s) for long symbols. One idea is to have separate sections for CRCs and symbol names. section __version_crc: 0x12345678 0x23456789 0x34567890 section __version_sym: "very_very_very_very_long_symbol" "another_very_very_very_very_very_long_symbol" "yet_another_very_very_very_very_very_long_symbol" You can iterate in each section with this: crc += sizeof(u32); name += strlen(name) + 1; Benefits: - No next pointer - No padding - *.mod.c is kept human readable. BTW, the following is impossible because the pointer reference to .rodata is not available at this point? struct modversion_info { u32 crc; const char *name: }; -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada