unofficial mirror of libc-alpha@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc: x86-64-abi <x86-64-abi@googlegroups.com>,
	Binutils <binutils@sourceware.org>,
	 GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: PT_NOTE alignment, NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0, glibc and gold
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 06:39:26 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMe9rOo2Qw7UV8ApqtN79=L47wtWGnvzakfFveQmoUyjK=jpew@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <480f513b-cfee-311a-0793-55eec81cd0fa@redhat.com>

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 6:31 AM, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 08/16/2018 03:19 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 6:00 AM, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 08/07/2018 10:41 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The .note.gnu.property section with NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 has been
>>>> added to Linux Extensions to gABI:
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/hjl-tools/linux-abi
>>>>
>>>> GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_USED and GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_NEEDED are
>>>> processor-specific program property types for i386 and x86-64.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The specification is incomplete as far as alignment matters are
>>> concerned.
>>
>>
>> https://github.com/hjl-tools/linux-abi/wiki/linux-abi-draft.pdf
>>
>> has
>>
>> 2.1.7 Alignment of Note Sections
>>
>> All entries in a PT_NOTE segment have the same alignment which equals to
>> the
>> p_align field in program header.
>> According to gABI, each note entry should be aligned to 4 bytes in 32-bit
>> objects or 8 bytes in 64-bit objects. But .note.ABI-tag section (see
>> Section 2.1.6) and .note.gnu.build-id section (see Section 2.1.4) are
>> aligned
>> to 4 bytes in both 32-bit and 64-bit objects. Note parser should use
>> p_align for
>> note alignment, instead of assuming alignment based on ELF file class.
>
>
> This is still ambiguous, particularly based on your comments below.

https://github.com/hjl-tools/linux-abi/wiki/linux-abi-draft.pdf

conforms to gABI unless stated otherwise.

>>> Is the link editor supposed to maintain separate segments for notes with
>>> different alignments?  Or is it possible to merge the notes into a single
>>> segment, potentially after adjusting alignment?
>>>
>>
>> It is possible.  We just need to place 4-byte aligned notes after 8-byte
>> aligned notes.
>
>
> Based on section 2.1.7, this would not be valid by itself because the
> section needs to have 8-byte alignment (to satisfy the property notes
> requirement).  All notes in the segment need to have the same alignment
> (because p_align is supposed to be used for parsing).  So reordering alone
> will not produce a valid segment.
>
> Part of the problem is that the note header is 12 bytes (not a multiple of
> 8), and that the name and descriptor lengths do not include the padding
> (which makes sense), so you really need a correct source of alignment.
>
> If we want to generate a single segment (and I think we should), we need to
> realign the notes to a common alignment, either 4 or 8 bytes.  That's what
> gold seems todo right now, with 4-byte alignment.

I was wrong.  We need 2 NOTE segments one fore 8-byte alignment and
one for 4-byte alignment.

>>> Is the link editor *required* to produce 8-byte alignment for notes in
>>> ELFCLASS64 objects?
>>
>>
>> It is decided by the alignment of NOTE section, not by linker.
>>
>>> Currently, we do not have agreement between binutils (particularly gold)
>>> and
>>> the glibc dynamic loader when it comes to alignment of PT_NOTE segments.
>>> glibc will disregard property notes in ELFCLASS64 objects which have
>>> 4-byte
>>> alignment, but gold produces such notes.  This needs to be fixed.
>>
>>
>> I don't believe this is true.  See above.
>
>
> Which part?  I see the 4-byte segment alignment with gold from
> binutils-2.31.1-11.fc29.x86_64.
>

glibc only discards 4-byte aligned NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 note
since NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 note follows gABI.  If gold
generates 4 byte alignment, it is a gold bug.

>> After this commit:
>>
>> commit 8d81ce0c6d6ca923571e8b2bac132929f9a02973
>> Author: H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
>> Date:   Tue Nov 28 09:56:47 2017 -0800
>>
>>      Properly compute offsets of note descriptor and next note [BZ #22370]
>
> …
>>
>> glibc can handle both 4 byte and 8 byte NOTE alignments.
>
>
> There's still this code in glibc, in sysdeps/x86/dl-prop.h:
>
>   /* The NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 note must be aliged to 4 bytes in
>      32-bit objects and to 8 bytes in 64-bit objects.  Skip notes
>      with incorrect alignment.  */
>   if (align != (__ELF_NATIVE_CLASS / 8))
>     return;
>

This code is correct.  NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 follows gABI.


-- 
H.J.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-08-16 13:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <CAMe9rOrrayKnc_cPm4SmnDnUGLbBUmOYMBTMOM8KLAHVmb=rUQ@mail.gmail.com>
2018-08-16 13:00 ` PT_NOTE alignment, NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0, glibc and gold (was: Re: [PATCH] Document GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_[USED|NEEDED]) Florian Weimer
2018-08-16 13:19   ` H.J. Lu
2018-08-16 13:29     ` H.J. Lu
2018-08-16 13:31     ` PT_NOTE alignment, NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0, glibc and gold Florian Weimer
2018-08-16 13:39       ` H.J. Lu [this message]
2018-08-16 14:01         ` Florian Weimer
2018-08-16 14:43           ` H.J. Lu
2018-08-16 14:21         ` Florian Weimer
2018-08-16 17:46           ` H.J. Lu
2018-08-16 19:16           ` Mark Wielaard
2018-08-16 19:36             ` H.J. Lu
2018-08-17  6:04               ` Mark Wielaard
2018-08-17  6:20             ` Florian Weimer
2018-08-17  6:41               ` Mark Wielaard
2018-08-17 15:10                 ` H.J. Lu
2018-08-17 21:05                   ` Mark Wielaard
2018-08-21 23:02                     ` Cary Coutant
2018-08-22  9:39                       ` Florian Weimer
2018-08-22 10:08                         ` Mark Wielaard
2018-08-22 23:36                         ` Cary Coutant
2018-08-24 18:39                           ` Florian Weimer
2018-08-23 14:41                         ` Michael Matz
2018-08-23 14:43                           ` Florian Weimer
2018-08-17 15:13               ` H.J. Lu
2018-09-19 19:22   ` Florian Weimer
2018-09-21 12:55     ` Michael Matz
2018-09-21 13:04       ` Florian Weimer
2018-09-26 17:39     ` Cary Coutant
2018-09-26 18:36       ` H.J. Lu

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/involved.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAMe9rOo2Qw7UV8ApqtN79=L47wtWGnvzakfFveQmoUyjK=jpew@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
    --cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
    --cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
    --cc=x86-64-abi@googlegroups.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).