[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151113064951.GD13513@packer-debian-8-amd64.digitalocean.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 01:49:51 -0500
From: Jessica Yu <jeyu@...hat.com>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Seth Jennings <sjenning@...hat.com>,
Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.com>,
Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
live-patching@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: elf: add livepatch-specific elf constants
+++ Josh Poimboeuf [12/11/15 09:45 -0600]:
>On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 11:45:51PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote:
>> Add livepatch elf reloc section flag, livepatch symbol bind
>> and section index
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jessica Yu <jeyu@...hat.com>
>> ---
>> include/uapi/linux/elf.h | 3 +++
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/elf.h b/include/uapi/linux/elf.h
>> index 71e1d0e..967ce1b 100644
>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/elf.h
>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/elf.h
>> @@ -118,6 +118,7 @@ typedef __s64 Elf64_Sxword;
>> #define STB_LOCAL 0
>> #define STB_GLOBAL 1
>> #define STB_WEAK 2
>> +#define STB_LIVEPATCH_EXT 11
>>
>> #define STT_NOTYPE 0
>> #define STT_OBJECT 1
>> @@ -286,6 +287,7 @@ typedef struct elf64_phdr {
>> #define SHF_ALLOC 0x2
>> #define SHF_EXECINSTR 0x4
>> #define SHF_MASKPROC 0xf0000000
>> +#define SHF_RELA_LIVEPATCH 0x4000000
>
>Writing the value with leading zeros (0x04000000) would it more
>readable.
>
>Also the OS-specific range mask (SHF_MASKOS) is 0x0ff00000. Any reason
>you went with 0x04000000 as opposed to the first value in the range
>(0x00100000)? I don't see anybody else using that value.
I don't have any particular reason, I think I just picked any value
and ran with it. I'll just change it to the first value in the range
since that makes more sense.
>> /* special section indexes */
>> #define SHN_UNDEF 0
>> @@ -295,6 +297,7 @@ typedef struct elf64_phdr {
>> #define SHN_ABS 0xfff1
>> #define SHN_COMMON 0xfff2
>> #define SHN_HIRESERVE 0xffff
>> +#define SHN_LIVEPATCH 0xff21
>
>Similar question here, why not use 0xff20 (SHN_LOOS)?
>
>--
>Josh
--
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