Message-ID: <46E9B30E.1080402@goop.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 15:00:46 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.5 (X11/20070719)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortel.com>
CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
       James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>, bapper@piratehaven.org,
       aaw@google.com
Subject: Re: RFC: bug in load_elf_binary?
References: <46E5B6FA.7000902@nortel.com> <46E83191.5070208@nortel.com>
In-Reply-To: <46E83191.5070208@nortel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1128
Lines: 26

Chris Friesen wrote:
> The elf spec says that PT_LOAD segments must be ordered by vaddr.  We
> want to have a segment at a relatively low fixed vaddr.  The exact
> address is not important, except that it's lower than the standard elf
> headers and so it must be the first segment in the elf file.

So you want a zero mapping at a particular address?  So the vaddr and
the memsz are set, but offset and filesz are zero?

> In the kernel elf loader, the p_vaddr and p_offset of the first
> segment are used to determine the load_addr for use with the rest of
> the segments.  In the case of this elf file, the first segment does
> not actually have a valid p_offset.

Well, you could make the p_offset the same as the first segment with a
non-zero filesz.  That should satisfy the elf loader, though it might
still confuse things.

Why can't you create this mapping at runtime?

    J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/