[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7fdc102e-75ea-6d91-d2a3-7fe8c91802ce@linux.microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 11:03:21 -0500
From: "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@...ux.microsoft.com>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
'Mark Rutland' <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-integrity <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/4] [RFC] Implement Trampoline File Descriptor
On 8/3/20 3:27 AM, David Laight wrote:
> From: Mark Rutland
>> Sent: 31 July 2020 19:32
> ...
>>> It requires PC-relative data references. I have not worked on all architectures.
>>> So, I need to study this. But do all ISAs support PC-relative data references?
>> Not all do, but pretty much any recent ISA will as it's a practical
>> necessity for fast position-independent code.
> i386 has neither PC-relative addressing nor moves from %pc.
> The cpu architecture knows that the sequence:
> call 1f
> 1: pop %reg
> is used to get the %pc value so is treated specially so that
> it doesn't 'trash' the return stack.
>
> So PIC code isn't too bad, but you have to use the correct
> sequence.
Is that true only for 32-bit systems only? I thought RIP-relative addressing was
introduced in 64-bit mode. Please confirm.
Madhavan
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.
