lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Apr]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: PIE infrastructure
On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 01:15:03AM +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Well, do you want me to iterate and use fncpy on all the functions from
> the generated binary?

No, because that will break the image too.

> I'm not sure this is necessary as the generated binary is self contained
> and doing so will force me to also ensure the offsets are kept the same.
> Doing only one copy is much more convenient. However, I still need to
> ensure the destination address is properly 8-byte aligned and the
> flush_icache_range().

What you need to do is to immitate being an ELF loader - in other words,
copy the blob according to the alignment rules of the blob (which may be
greater than 8-byte alignment) and use the symbol table to find the
functions and the type of the function (ARM vs ELF).

> I understand this is abusing fncpy() but it does want I need (still, I'm
> planning to avoid the BUG() by always passing a properly aligned
> destination address).

Yea yea yea, such arguments don't wash with me, sorry. The "but it does
what I need" is total bollocks, sorry. fncpy() is designed for a
purpose, and what you're doing is an abuse of it, one which I will not
stand for for the sake of long term maintainability.

--
RMK's Patch system: http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-04-27 22:01    [W:0.064 / U:1.528 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site