[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160516103051.GA11330@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 12:30:51 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/boot: Refuse to build with data relocations
* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 05/12/16 15:54, Kees Cook wrote:
> >>
> >> It would be far better to warn on the *type* of relocations rather than in which section they feel.
> >
> > I'm open to specific changes. What's the best way to detect what you want here?
> >
>
> Use readelf -r and look for inappropriate relocation types (which are
> basically the same ones that we should have to muck with for the main
> kernel in relocs.c.)
I suspect initially we are good if we don't allow any relocations in
arch/x86/boot/compressed/vmlinux:
fomalhaut:~/linux/linux> readelf -r arch/x86/boot/compressed/vmlinux | grep -q 'There are no relocations in this file' ; echo $?
0
versus a regular object file with lots of relocations:
fomalhaut:~/linux/linux> readelf -r arch/x86/built-in.o | grep -q 'There are no relocations in this file' ; echo $?
1
I.e. the relevant portion of Kees's patch would do something like:
quiet_cmd_check_data_rel = DATAREL $@
define cmd_check_data_rel
for obj in $(filter %.o,$^); do \
readelf -r $$obj | grep -qF 'There are no relocations in this file' && exit 0 || { \
echo "error: $$obj has data relocations!" >&2; \
exit 1; \
} \
done
endef
(totally untested)
Agreed?
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists