linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: mm: hide __start_rodata_section

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

Message-ID: <CAKv+Gu-WAcw1q4s_UgOoM5DGerZ-aM_CToVG6C8-Bt6xzt-LMg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 16 Feb 2016 17:36:33 +0100
From:	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Chris Brandt <chris.brandt@...esas.com>,
	Laura Abbott <labbott@...oraproject.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: mm: hide __start_rodata_section_aligned for
 non-debug builds

On 16 February 2016 at 17:34, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> On Tuesday 16 February 2016 17:12:52 Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> > +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_RODATA
>> >  /*
>> >   * Without CONFIG_DEBUG_ALIGN_RODATA, __start_rodata_section_aligned will
>> >   * be the first section-aligned location after __start_rodata. Otherwise,
>> >   * it will be equal to __start_rodata.
>> >   */
>> >  __start_rodata_section_aligned = ALIGN(__start_rodata, 1 << SECTION_SHIFT);
>> > +#endif
>> >
>>
>> Does
>>
>> PROVIDE(__start_rodata_section_aligned = xxx);
>>
>> do the trick as well? If it does, it's a bit cleaner.
>>
>
> I would assume not, as the problem is that SECTION_SHIFT is a macro that
> is not defined when the MMU is disabled.
>

I just tested it myself, and it in fact does work.

PROVIDE() means the expression is evaluated lazily, and SECTION_SHIFT
is just an undefined identifier in the linker script scope if the
preprocessor does not define it.

Anyway, I don't have a strong preference, so ack either way.