[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180329180112.11055-1-labbott@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 11:01:09 -0700
From: Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, mjw@...oraproject.org,
"H . J . Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Cc: Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Nick Clifton <nickc@...hat.com>,
Cary Coutant <ccoutant@...il.com>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections
Hi,
This is v2 of my proposal to allow unique build-ids in the kernel. from
last time:
""
In Fedora, the debug information is packaged separately (foo-debuginfo) and
can be installed separately. There's been a long standing issue where only one
version of a debuginfo info package can be installed at a time. Mark Wielaard
made an effort for Fedora 27 to allow parallel installation of debuginfo (see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ParallelInstallableDebuginfo for
more details)
Part of the requirement to allow this to work is that build ids are
unique between builds. The existing upstream rpm implementation ensures
this by re-calculating the build-id using the version and release as a
seed. This doesn't work 100% for the kernel because of the vDSO which is
its own binary and doesn't get updated. After poking holes in a few of my
ideas, there was a discussion with some people from the binutils team about
adding --build-id-salt to let ld do the calculation debugedit is doing. There
was a counter proposal made about adding some extra information via a .comment
which will affect the build id calculation but just get stripped out.
""
This v2 cleans up the naming to be consistent and also switches to a
config option vs. an environment variable. I've seen some sporadic
failures about missing the generated header so I think I'm still missing
a dependency somewhere. I'm still mostly looking for feedback whether
this would be acceptable for merging or if we should just persue a
--build-id-salt in binutils.
Thanks,
Laura
Laura Abbott (3):
kbuild: Introduce build-salt generated header
kbuild: Link with generated build-salt header
x86/vdso: Add build salt to the vDSO
Makefile | 13 +++++++++++--
arch/x86/entry/vdso/vdso-layout.lds.S | 3 +++
init/Kconfig | 8 ++++++++
scripts/.gitignore | 1 +
scripts/Makefile | 2 +-
scripts/build-salt.lds.S | 5 +++++
scripts/gensalt | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
scripts/link-vmlinux.sh | 3 ++-
8 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 scripts/build-salt.lds.S
create mode 100755 scripts/gensalt
--
2.16.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists