Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200109150218.16544-1-nivedita@alum.mit.edu> <20200109150218.16544-2-nivedita@alum.mit.edu>
 <20200222050845.GA19912@ubuntu-m2-xlarge-x86> <20200222065521.GA11284@zn.tnic>
 <20200222070218.GA27571@ubuntu-m2-xlarge-x86> <20200222072144.asqaxlv364s6ezbv@google.com>
 <20200222074254.GB11284@zn.tnic> <20200222162225.GA3326744@rani.riverdale.lan>
 <CAKwvOdnvMS21s9gLp5nUpDAOu=c7-iWYuKTeFUq+PMhsJOKUgw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LSU.2.21.2002241319150.12812@wotan.suse.de>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.21.2002241319150.12812@wotan.suse.de>
From:   Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Date:   Mon, 24 Feb 2020 12:51:14 -0800
Message-ID: <CAKwvOd=nCAyXtng1N-fvNYa=-NGD0yu+Rm6io9F1gs0FieatwA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/boot/compressed: Remove unnecessary sections from bzImage
To:     Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>
Cc:     Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>,
        Fangrui Song <maskray@google.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 5:28 AM Michael Matz <matz@suse.de> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Sat, 22 Feb 2020, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
>
> > > > > In GNU ld, it seems that .shstrtab .symtab and .strtab are special
> > > > > cased. Neither the input section description *(.shstrtab) nor *(*)
> > > > > discards .shstrtab . I feel that this is a weird case (probably even a bug)
> > > > > that lld should not implement.
> > > >
> > > > Ok, forget what the tools do for a second: why is .shstrtab special and
> > > > why would one want to keep it?
> > > >
> > > > Because one still wants to know what the section names of an object are
> > > > or other tools need it or why?
> > > >
> > > > Thx.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Regards/Gruss,
> > > >     Boris.
> > > >
> > > > https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
> > >
> > > .shstrtab is required by the ELF specification. The e_shstrndx field in
> > > the ELF header is the index of .shstrtab, and each section in the
> > > section table is required to have an sh_name that points into the
> > > .shstrtab.
> >
> > Yeah, I can see it both ways.  That `*` doesn't glob all remaining
> > sections is surprising to me, but bfd seems to be "extra helpful" in
> > not discarding sections that are required via ELF spec.
>
> In a way the /DISCARD/ assignment should be thought of as applying to
> _input_ sections (as all such section references on the RHS), not
> necessarily to output sections.  What this then means for sections that
> are synthesized by the link editor is less clear.  Some of them are
> generated regardless (as you noted, e.g. the symbol table and associated
> string sections, including section name string table), some of them are
> suppressed, and either lead to an followup error (e.g. with .gnu.hash), or
> to invalid output (e.g. missing .dynsym for executables simply lead to
> segfaults when running them).
>
> That's the reason for the perceived inconsistency with behaviour on '*':
> it's application to synthesized sections.  Arguably bfd should be fixed to
> also not discard the other essential sections (or alternatively to give an
> error when an essential section is discarded).  The lld behaviour of e.g.
> discarding .shstrtab (or other synthesized sections necessary for valid
> ELF output) doesn't make much sense either, though.

Hi Michael, thank you for the precise feedback.  Do you have a list of
"synthesized sections necessary for valid ELF output?" Also, could you
point me to the documentation about `*` and its relation to
"synthesized sections necessary for valid ELF output?"  This will help
me file a precise bug against LLD.
-- 
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers