linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To: Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org>, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	"Michal Suchánek" <msuchanek@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] module: add elf_check_module_arch for module specific elf arch checks
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 12:37:12 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87v96esffr.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YMiaZOqhHck9iy0n@p200300cbcf109700df096d564fe976c3.dip0.t-ipconnect.de>

Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org> writes:
> +++ Nicholas Piggin [15/06/21 12:05 +1000]:
>>Excerpts from Jessica Yu's message of June 14, 2021 10:06 pm:
>>> +++ Nicholas Piggin [11/06/21 19:39 +1000]:
>>>>The elf_check_arch() function is used to test usermode binaries, but
>>>>kernel modules may have more specific requirements. powerpc would like
>>>>to test for ABI version compatibility.
>>>>
>>>>Add an arch-overridable function elf_check_module_arch() that defaults
>>>>to elf_check_arch() and use it in elf_validity_check().
>>>>
>>>>Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
>>>>[np: split patch, added changelog]
>>>>Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
>>>>---
>>>> include/linux/moduleloader.h | 5 +++++
>>>> kernel/module.c              | 2 +-
>>>> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>>diff --git a/include/linux/moduleloader.h b/include/linux/moduleloader.h
>>>>index 9e09d11ffe5b..fdc042a84562 100644
>>>>--- a/include/linux/moduleloader.h
>>>>+++ b/include/linux/moduleloader.h
>>>>@@ -13,6 +13,11 @@
>>>>  * must be implemented by each architecture.
>>>>  */
>>>>
>>>>+// Allow arch to optionally do additional checking of module ELF header
>>>>+#ifndef elf_check_module_arch
>>>>+#define elf_check_module_arch elf_check_arch
>>>>+#endif
>>>
>>> Hi Nicholas,
>>>
>>> Why not make elf_check_module_arch() consistent with the other
>>> arch-specific functions? Please see module_frob_arch_sections(),
>>> module_{init,exit}_section(), etc in moduleloader.h. That is, they are
>>> all __weak functions that are overridable by arches. We can maybe make
>>> elf_check_module_arch() a weak symbol, available for arches to
>>> override if they want to perform additional elf checks. Then we don't
>>> have to have this one-off #define.

>>Like this? I like it. Good idea.
>
> Yeah! Also, maybe we can alternatively make elf_check_module_arch() a
> separate check entirely so that the powerpc implementation doesn't
> have to include that extra elf_check_arch() call. Something like this maybe?

My thinking for making elf_check_module_arch() the only hook was that
conceivably you might not want/need to call elf_check_arch() from
elf_check_module_arch().

So having a single module specific hook allows arch code to decide
how to implement the check, which may or may not involve calling
elf_check_arch(), but that becomes an arch implementation detail.

It's also one arch hook instead of two (although elf_check_arch()
already exists).

But I don't feel that strongly either way, whatever you prefer.

cheers

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-06-16  2:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-06-11  9:39 [PATCH v4 0/2] powerpc/64: Option to use ELF V2 ABI for big-endian Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-11  9:39 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] module: add elf_check_module_arch for module specific elf arch checks Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-14 12:06   ` Jessica Yu
2021-06-15  2:05     ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-15 12:17       ` Jessica Yu
2021-06-15 12:50         ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-06-15 13:41           ` Jessica Yu
2021-06-15 14:30             ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-06-16  2:39               ` Michael Ellerman
2021-06-16  1:18         ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-16 12:54           ` Jessica Yu
2021-06-17  5:21             ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-16  2:37         ` Michael Ellerman [this message]
2021-06-16 13:49           ` Jessica Yu
2021-06-11  9:39 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] powerpc/64: Option to use ELF V2 ABI for big-endian kernels Nicholas Piggin
2021-06-11  9:58   ` Michal Suchánek
2021-06-11 10:20     ` Michal Suchánek

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

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

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87v96esffr.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au \
    --to=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=jeyu@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=msuchanek@suse.de \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.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 NNTP newsgroup(s).