From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [IPv6:2620:52:3:1:0:246e:9693:128c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0FAE01F5AE for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 10:05:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEB453857C5F; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 10:05:06 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org AEB453857C5F DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1596017106; bh=nsn5GhpuomaZhywkr1kGAYuwTixWz6+LBppnzXIdVY8=; h=To:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=EU+zjpOBtDwXsbUT5uoT9CvNqmQfk9zBV/nLD5tyiNghk/DBHhmM2I4Pzorkl6Vsg swaQ+MQbpKnvrdqvx2y9MSteQyLwUIbiE5zoudRwra0uanmex8O6pOjHmSMreyNiJt fB8qzOIfpsO92i8uNCXEDlYP7yWOHaESZBuWBTRg= Received: from us-smtp-delivery-74.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-74.mimecast.com [216.205.24.74]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF2813858D35 for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 10:05:03 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org BF2813858D35 Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-113-8uynZaXYOq6aOw8mguuwwg-1; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 06:05:01 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 8uynZaXYOq6aOw8mguuwwg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 92B4A8005B0; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 10:05:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg2.str.redhat.com (ovpn-113-29.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.29]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 099EC6FEC6; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 10:04:55 +0000 (UTC) To: Szabolcs Nagy Subject: Re: [PATCH] aarch64: update NEWS about branch protection References: <20200729080850.26078-1-szabolcs.nagy@arm.com> <87bljyspte.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <20200729084930.GS7127@arm.com> <87lfj2r8z4.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <20200729091734.GT7127@arm.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 12:04:54 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20200729091734.GT7127@arm.com> (Szabolcs Nagy's message of "Wed, 29 Jul 2020 10:17:34 +0100") Message-ID: <878sf2r60p.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Florian Weimer via Libc-alpha Reply-To: Florian Weimer Cc: Jakub Jelinek , libc-alpha@sourceware.org, jeremy.linton@arm.com Errors-To: libc-alpha-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Libc-alpha" * Szabolcs Nagy: >> Are there any ELF notes I should watch out for? > > readelf should show > > GNU 0x00000010 NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 Properties: AArch64 feature: BTI > > (PAC may be missing in some libgcc asm, that's > fixed up in gcc-trunk, but it's harmless.) Thanks. It looks like with the flags in CFLAGS, the notes are indeed there in some cases, because RPM debugedit chokes on them: explicitly decompress any DWARF compressed ELF sections in /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/glibc-2.31.9000-23.fc33.aarch64/usr/bin/gencat extracting debug info from /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/glibc-2.31.9000-23.fc33.aarch64/usr/bin/gencat Failed to update file: invalid section entry size I'll try to figure out what is going on there. It's a bit suspicious that this is the first dynamically linked binary, so maybe the notes are missing from the shared objects and statically linked binaries still. Thanks, Florian