linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v1] perf symbol: Correct address for bss symbols

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 24 Jul 2022 10:38:40 +0800
From:   Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>
To:     Fangrui Song <maskray@...gle.com>
Cc:     Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Chang Rui <changruinj@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1] perf symbol: Correct address for bss symbols

Hi Fangrui,

On Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 08:29:52PM -0700, Fangrui Song wrote:

[...]

> > We need to create symbol info for not only .text section but also for
> > .data section and .bss sectionṡ.  So based on the data address, we can
> > know what's the symbol for the data access.
> >
> > But I need to correct the description for "st_value" [1]: In
> > executable and shared object files, st_value holds a virtual address.
> > To make these files' symbols more useful for the dynamic linker, the
> > section offset (file interpretation) gives way to a virtual address
> > (memory interpretation) for which the section number is irrelevant.
> >
> > So perf tool uses the formula "st_value - sh_addr + sh_offset" to
> > convert from the memory address to file address.  But it calculates
> > the wrong file address because "sh_offset" doesn't respect the
> > alignment.
> 
> Thanks for the explanation. I think st_value - p_vaddr + p_offset  may
> be a better formula where p_vaddr/p_offset is from the PT_LOAD program
> header.
> 
> For a SHT_NOBITS section, sh_offset may not be accurate, but PT_LOAD
> has precise information.

Thanks a lot for suggestion, it's very helpful and reasonable for me!

I struggled a bit for considering two things.  One is how to refactor
kernel symbol parsing with PT_LOAD program headers, because the kernel
symbol parsing is relative complex for both kernel symbols and module
symbols, this is why I didn't move furthermore for refactoring kernel
symbol parsing.

The second thing is I observe there have some spurious symbols with
'st_value' are zeros.  So there have an extra fixing for this case.

Welcome comments or suggestions for the new patch set:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220724022857.2621520-1-leo.yan@linaro.org/T/#t

Thanks,
Leo