[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100528062342.GA20365@mcafee.com>
Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 16:23:42 +1000
From: David McCullough <david_mccullough@...fee.com>
To: Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
CC: uclinux-dev@...inux.org, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Greg Ungerer <gerg@...inux.org>,
Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
uclinux-dist-devel@...ckfin.uclinux.org,
microblaze-uclinux@...e.uq.edu.au, Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>,
linux-m32r@...linux-m32r.org,
Hirokazu Takata <takata@...ux-m32r.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v2] FLAT: split the stack & data alignments
Jivin Mike Frysinger lays it down ...
> The stack and data have different alignment requirements, so don't force
> them to wear the same shoe. Increase the data alignment to match that
> which the elf2flt linker script has always been using: 0x20 bytes. Not
> only does this bring the kernel loader in line with the toolchain, but
> it also fixes a swath of gcc tests which try to force larger alignment
> values but randomly fail when the FLAT loader fails to deliver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
Acked-by: David McCullough <david_mccullough@...fee.com>
Cheers,
Davidm
> ---
> v2
> - split changes & document better
>
> fs/binfmt_flat.c | 23 +++++++++++++++--------
> 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/binfmt_flat.c b/fs/binfmt_flat.c
> index 49566c1..b865622 100644
> --- a/fs/binfmt_flat.c
> +++ b/fs/binfmt_flat.c
> @@ -56,15 +56,22 @@
> #endif
>
> /*
> - * User data (stack, data section and bss) needs to be aligned
> - * for the same reasons as SLAB memory is, and to the same amount.
> - * Avoid duplicating architecture specific code by using the same
> - * macro as with SLAB allocation:
> + * User data (data section and bss) needs to be aligned.
> + * We pick 0x20 here because it is the max value elf2flt has always
> + * used in producing FLAT files, and because it seems to be large
> + * enough to make all the gcc alignment related tests happy.
> + */
> +#define FLAT_DATA_ALIGN (0x20)
> +
> +/*
> + * User data (stack) also needs to be aligned.
> + * Here we can be a bit looser than the data sections since this
> + * needs to only meet arch ABI requirements.
> */
> #ifdef ARCH_SLAB_MINALIGN
> -#define FLAT_DATA_ALIGN (ARCH_SLAB_MINALIGN)
> +#define FLAT_STACK_ALIGN (ARCH_SLAB_MINALIGN)
> #else
> -#define FLAT_DATA_ALIGN (sizeof(void *))
> +#define FLAT_STACK_ALIGN (sizeof(void *))
> #endif
>
> #define RELOC_FAILED 0xff00ff01 /* Relocation incorrect somewhere */
> @@ -129,7 +136,7 @@ static unsigned long create_flat_tables(
>
> sp = (unsigned long *)p;
> sp -= (envc + argc + 2) + 1 + (flat_argvp_envp_on_stack() ? 2 : 0);
> - sp = (unsigned long *) ((unsigned long)sp & -FLAT_DATA_ALIGN);
> + sp = (unsigned long *) ((unsigned long)sp & -FLAT_STACK_ALIGN);
> argv = sp + 1 + (flat_argvp_envp_on_stack() ? 2 : 0);
> envp = argv + (argc + 1);
>
> @@ -876,7 +883,7 @@ static int load_flat_binary(struct linux_binprm * bprm, struct pt_regs * regs)
> stack_len = TOP_OF_ARGS - bprm->p; /* the strings */
> stack_len += (bprm->argc + 1) * sizeof(char *); /* the argv array */
> stack_len += (bprm->envc + 1) * sizeof(char *); /* the envp array */
> - stack_len += FLAT_DATA_ALIGN - 1; /* reserve for upcoming alignment */
> + stack_len += FLAT_STACK_ALIGN - 1; /* reserve for upcoming alignment */
>
> res = load_flat_file(bprm, &libinfo, 0, &stack_len);
> if (IS_ERR_VALUE(res))
> --
> 1.7.1
>
>
>
--
David McCullough, david_mccullough@...fee.com, Ph:+61 734352815
McAfee - SnapGear http://www.mcafee.com http://www.uCdot.org
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists