linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86: record relocation offset

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 30 Dec 2009 15:26:55 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>
CC:	Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86: record relocation offset

Modules are a completely separate thing - they are linked (not even just relocated) at insertion time, so they need to be tracked separately.

The statement that a _text-based relocation is insufficient is false.  The entire x86-32 monolithic kernel is relocated as a unit.  The x86-64 kernel, too, is relocated as a unit, but using the page tables, which means it always runs at the compile-time-selected virtual address.

    -hpa

"James Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@...e.de> wrote:

>On Wed, 2009-12-30 at 19:58 -0200, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>> Em Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 06:39:36PM -0200, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
>> > Em Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 11:45:30AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin escreveu:
>> > > The kernel already knows where it is loaded -- obviously, by sheer
>> > > necessity -- and knows how it was itself configured, and as such we
>> > > can do this calculation in C code without modifying boot_params or
>> > > the early bootstrap.
>> > 
>> > Problem is that at 'perf record' time we may not have access to the
>> > vmlinux file, and thus not be able to figure out the relocation applied
>> > in that boot.
>> > 
>> > Then, at a later time, and possibly on another machine, on another arch,
>> > we try to map back IPs to symbols, the /proc/kallsyms is completely
>> > unrelated and we now have a vmlinux unrelocated...
>> > 
>> > So we need a way to get the relocation applied at 'perf record' time and
>> > encode it in the perf.data header. Ideas about how to do that?
>> 
>> Well, I guess we could do the _stext trick again, storing its value,
>> taken from /proc/kallsyms, into the perf.data header, then figuring out
>> the relocation by looking at its value in the vmlinux symtab.
>
>So reading the thread, I think the problem only exists for x86 compiled
>as a relocateable kernel.
>
>> There were concerns in the past about relying on _stext, IIRC, James?
>
>Well, the original concerns were that _text relative relocation
>resolution only works for the core kernel, not for modules.
>Additionally, the kernel is in several sections, most notably init and
>runtime ... these may get loaded at different locations so _text
>relative symbol resolution won't work in init sections.
>
>Right at the moment, only x86 and ppc do a relocatable kernel, and, as I
>understand the process, the whole kernel image gets a relative offset
>applied, so all sections get the same offset.  Thus, for this case it
>looks like computing the offset from any known symbol would work
>(including _text).
>
>James
>
>
>
>

--
Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse any lack of formatting.