linux-kernel - Re: "m68k: Cleanup linker scripts using new linker script macros." and old binutils (was: Re: [PATCH] m68k: Atari EtherNAT

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-id: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1001112040120.31572@zirkon.biophys.uni-duesseldorf.de>
Date:	Mon, 11 Jan 2010 21:08:07 +0100 (CET)
From:	Michael Schmitz <schmitz@...phys.uni-duesseldorf.de>
To:	Andreas Schwab <schwab@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:	Tim Abbott <tabbott@...lice.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: "m68k: Cleanup linker scripts using new linker script macros." and
 old binutils (was: Re: [PATCH] m68k: Atari EtherNAT - Nicolas Pitre has a new
 email address)

Hi Andreas,

> > FWIW: when stripping the new kernel, I get this warning:
> >
> > BFD: st7CwWnM: warning: allocated section `.init_end' not in segment
> 
> This is actually your problem.  The .init_end section is kind of special
> because it only contains an ALIGN.  What do you get from running
> "readelf -l vmlinux"?

Followup on this: You are absolutely right - the problem appears to be related 
to the the .init_end section _only_ having the ALIGN, and nothing else (i.e. 
no actual section content). 

Placing the align in the .m68k_fixup section like such:

--- arch/m68k/kernel/vmlinux-std.lds.org	2010-01-09 11:01:05.000000000 
+1300
+++ arch/m68k/kernel/vmlinux-std.lds	2010-01-12 08:43:07.000000000 +1300
@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@
 	__start_fixup = .;
 	*(.m68k_fixup)
 	__stop_fixup = .;
+        . = ALIGN(PAGE_SIZE);
   }
   NOTES
   .init_end : {

still puts .init_end, __init_end and _end on a page boundary, but also extends
the load section up to that page boundary. (Unfortunately, it also extends the 
kernel file size by a bit). 

Can the same be achieved in a more elegant way? The reason why the old script 
worked with my binutils appears to be the placement of the initramfs data right 
at the end - the start of initramfs is page aligned, and the size of the 
initramfs is an integer number of pages, so the end of initramfs data, 
__init_end and _end all are on a page boundary. With the fixup section now 
placed after the initramfs explicitly, this no longer happens by accident...

Cheers,

	Michael

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