[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190612093238.GQ28398@e103592.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 10:32:38 +0100
From: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>
To: Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>
Cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@...hat.com>,
"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
Vedvyas Shanbhogue <vedvyas.shanbhogue@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 22/27] binfmt_elf: Extract .note.gnu.property from an
ELF file
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 12:31:34PM -0700, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-06-11 at 12:41 +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 07:24:43PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > > * Yu-cheng Yu:
> > >
> > > > To me, looking at PT_GNU_PROPERTY and not trying to support anything is a
> > > > logical choice. And it breaks only a limited set of toolchains.
> > > >
> > > > I will simplify the parser and leave this patch as-is for anyone who wants
> > > > to
> > > > back-port. Are there any objections or concerns?
> > >
> > > Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 does not use PT_GNU_PROPERTY and is probably
> > > the largest collection of CET-enabled binaries that exists today.
> >
> > For clarity, RHEL is actively parsing these properties today?
> >
> > > My hope was that we would backport the upstream kernel patches for CET,
> > > port the glibc dynamic loader to the new kernel interface, and be ready
> > > to run with CET enabled in principle (except that porting userspace
> > > libraries such as OpenSSL has not really started upstream, so many
> > > processes where CET is particularly desirable will still run without
> > > it).
> > >
> > > I'm not sure if it is a good idea to port the legacy support if it's not
> > > part of the mainline kernel because it comes awfully close to creating
> > > our own private ABI.
> >
> > I guess we can aim to factor things so that PT_NOTE scanning is
> > available as a fallback on arches for which the absence of
> > PT_GNU_PROPERTY is not authoritative.
>
> We can probably check PT_GNU_PROPERTY first, and fallback (based on ld-linux
> version?) to PT_NOTE scanning?
For arm64, we can check for PT_GNU_PROPERTY and then give up
unconditionally.
For x86, we would fall back to PT_NOTE scanning, but this will add a bit
of cost to binaries that don't have NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0. The ld.so
version doesn't tell you what ELF ABI a given executable conforms to.
Since this sounds like it's largely a distro-specific issue, maybe there
could be a Kconfig option to turn the fallback PT_NOTE scanning on?
Cheers
---Dave
Powered by blists - more mailing lists