Re: [PATCH 1/5] arm64: PIE: Skip fixups if distance is zero

2020-09-25 Thread André Przywara
On 24/09/2020 21:22, Stephen Warren wrote: Hi Stephen, > On 9/24/20 8:45 AM, André Przywara wrote: >> On 24/09/2020 01:17, Andre Przywara wrote: >>> When the actual offset between link and runtime address is zero, there >>> is no need for patching up U-Boot early when running with >>>

Re: [PATCH 1/5] arm64: PIE: Skip fixups if distance is zero

2020-09-24 Thread Stephen Warren
On 9/24/20 8:45 AM, André Przywara wrote: > On 24/09/2020 01:17, Andre Przywara wrote: >> When the actual offset between link and runtime address is zero, there >> is no need for patching up U-Boot early when running with >> CONFIG_POSITION_INDEPENDENT. > > That turns out to be not fully true. >

Re: [PATCH 1/5] arm64: PIE: Skip fixups if distance is zero

2020-09-24 Thread Ard Biesheuvel
On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 at 16:45, André Przywara wrote: > > On 24/09/2020 01:17, Andre Przywara wrote: > > When the actual offset between link and runtime address is zero, there > > is no need for patching up U-Boot early when running with > > CONFIG_POSITION_INDEPENDENT. > > That turns out to be not

Re: [PATCH 1/5] arm64: PIE: Skip fixups if distance is zero

2020-09-24 Thread André Przywara
On 24/09/2020 01:17, Andre Przywara wrote: > When the actual offset between link and runtime address is zero, there > is no need for patching up U-Boot early when running with > CONFIG_POSITION_INDEPENDENT. That turns out to be not fully true. Some toolchains (all Linaro cross compilers?) don't

[PATCH 1/5] arm64: PIE: Skip fixups if distance is zero

2020-09-23 Thread Andre Przywara
When the actual offset between link and runtime address is zero, there is no need for patching up U-Boot early when running with CONFIG_POSITION_INDEPENDENT. Skip the whole routine when the distance is 0. This helps when U-Boot is loaded into ROM, or in otherwise sensitive memory locations.