On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 04:33:29PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote: > +++ Josh Poimboeuf [10/12/15 08:28 -0600]: > >On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 02:10:14PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote: > >>+++ Josh Poimboeuf [08/12/15 12:38 -0600]: > >>>>+ /* For each __klp_rela section for this object */ > >>>>+ klp_for_each_reloc_sec(obj, reloc_sec) { > >>>>+ relindex = reloc_sec->index; > >>>>+ num_relas = pmod->sechdrs[relindex].sh_size / sizeof(Elf_Rela); > >>>>+ rela = (Elf_Rela *) pmod->sechdrs[relindex].sh_addr; > >>>>+ > >>>>+ /* For each rela in this __klp_rela section */ > >>>>+ for (i = 0; i < num_relas; i++, rela++) { > >>>>+ sym = symtab + ELF_R_SYM(rela->r_info); > >>>>+ symname = pmod->core_strtab + sym->st_name; > >>>>+ > >>>>+ if (sym->st_shndx == SHN_LIVEPATCH) { > >>>>+ if (sym->st_info == 'K') > >>>>+ ret = klp_find_external_symbol(pmod, > >>>>symname, &addr); > >>>>+ else > >>>>+ ret = klp_find_object_symbol(obj->name, > >>>>symname, &addr); > >>>>+ if (ret) > >>>>+ return ret; > >>>>+ sym->st_value = addr; > >>> > >>>So I think you're also working on removing the 'external' stuff. Any > >>>idea how this code will handle that? Specifically I'm wondering how the > >>>objname and sympos of the rela's symbol will be specified. Maybe it can > >>>be encoded somehow in one of the symbol fields (st_value)? > >> > >>Thanks for bringing this up. I think we can just encode the symbol's > >>position in kallsyms in the symbol's st_other field. It isn't used > >>anywhere and has size char, which is plenty of bits to represent the > >>small ints. > > > >st_other does seem to at least have some trivial usage in the kernel, > >see print_absolute_symbols() and sym_visibility() in > >arch/x86/tools/relocs.c. Two of the bits are used to specify the > >"visibility" of a symbol. Also readelf shows a "Vis" column in the > >symbol table. > > Yeah, for x86 it looks like st_other is used only for SHN_ABS symbols > in print_absolute_symbols(). Technically SHN_LIVEPATCH symbols > shouldn't be affected in this case...but despite its sparse usage in the > kernel it does look like using st_other to encode sympos is out of the > question as its meaning is architecture specific.. > > >>For objname, the simplest solution might be to append ".klp.objname" > >>to the symbol name, and extract out this suffix when resolving the > >>symbol. Another way might be to have st_value contain the index into > >>the strtab (or .kpatch.strings) that contains the objname. Then we'd > >>access the objname just like how we access the symbol's name (strtab + > >>sym->st_name). After we find the objname we can then overwrite > >>st_value with the real address. I think this second method is cleaner. > >>Thoughts? > > > >Yeah, I guess there are a lot of possibilities for ways to encode it. > > > >Personally I think it would be nice if the encoding were something that > >could easily be seen when dumping the symbol table with readelf. So, > >for example, the objname could be encoded in the symbol name (as you > >suggested), and the sympos could be in st_value. > > Sure, that should be doable. So the new process might look like this: > > For every livepatch symbol referenced by a rela.. > > 1) Save the sympos encoded in st_value > > 2) Save the sym_objname that is encoded in the symbol's name with the > 'klp' suffix (Just to clarify: the sym_objname specifies the object > in which the symbol lives, and recall that we need this to remove the > need for the "external" flag) > > 3) Resolve the symbol by using its name (without the klp suffix), > sympos, and sym_objname > > 4) Set st_value to the found address
Sounds right to me. > >If we do that, it'd probably be good to keep the naming consistent with > >the '__klp_rela_objname.symname' thing. So something like > >'_klp_sym_objname.symname'. > > How about 'symname.klp.objname', and renaming the klp reloc sections > to '.klp.objname.rela.section_name'? Special symbol suffixes and > section names seem to always use '.', so maybe this would look better? > :-) But we can keep the underscores if people like that more. Both > naming methods would work, it is only a matter of preference. It's your patches, so I'd say you get to pick ;-) My only request would be some consistency between the symbol names and the rela section names. > >But... would there be any side effects associated with renaming it? For > >example, would it cause problems with the s390 PLT? Just to verify, did you see this question? :-) -- Josh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html