[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <89b77a4a-ef77-f746-1ae5-79bfc0d12ab0@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 16:08:27 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Juergen Gross
<jgross@...e.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...lanox.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christopher Li <sparse@...isli.org>,
Dou Liyang <douly.fnst@...fujitsu.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>,
Peter Foley <pefoley2@...oley.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, "H . J . Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>, Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>,
Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 20/22] x86/relocs: Add option to generate 64-bit relocations
On 07/19/17 15:47, Thomas Garnier wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 3:33 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
>> On 07/18/17 15:33, Thomas Garnier wrote:
>>> The x86 relocation tool generates a list of 32-bit signed integers. There
>>> was no need to use 64-bit integers because all addresses where above the 2G
>>> top of the memory.
>>>
>>> This change add a large-reloc option to generate 64-bit unsigned integers.
>>> It can be used when the kernel plan to go below the top 2G and 32-bit
>>> integers are not enough.
>>
>> Why on Earth? This would only be necessary if the *kernel itself* was
>> more than 2G, which isn't going to happen for the forseeable future.
>
> Because the relocation integer is an absolute address, not an offset
> in the binary. Next iteration, I can try using a 32-bit offset for
> everyone.
It is an absolute address *as the kernel was originally linked*, for
obvious reasons.
-hpa
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
