* [PATCH] bpf: Added linker support for R_BPF_64_NODYLD32.
@ 2023-12-20 13:23 Cupertino Miranda
2024-01-03 10:34 ` Jose E. Marchesi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Cupertino Miranda @ 2023-12-20 13:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: binutils; +Cc: nickc, elena.zannoni, jose.marchesi, Cupertino Miranda
Hi everyone,
This patch is in context of Nick Cliftons request in thread:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2023-October/130194.html
due to bug reported in:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2245296
For the time being the linker is not used in BPF infrastructure.
Considering that and without a proper way to validate the code, the
following patch is what I think is missing in order to add linker
support for the particular relocation.
Looking forward to your review.
Best regards,
Cupertino
This patch adds linker support to patch R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 relocations.
The implementation was based on comments and code in LLVM, as the GNU
toolchain does not uses this relocation type.
---
bfd/elf64-bpf.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/bfd/elf64-bpf.c b/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
index aefad7da5ac..5820dd3d7d4 100644
--- a/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
+++ b/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
@@ -276,6 +276,7 @@ bpf_elf_relocate_section (bfd *output_bfd ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
}
case R_BPF_64_ABS64:
case R_BPF_64_ABS32:
+ case R_BPF_64_NODYLD32:
{
addend = bfd_get (howto->bitsize, input_bfd, where);
relocation += addend;
--
2.30.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] bpf: Added linker support for R_BPF_64_NODYLD32.
2023-12-20 13:23 [PATCH] bpf: Added linker support for R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 Cupertino Miranda
@ 2024-01-03 10:34 ` Jose E. Marchesi
2024-01-08 10:16 ` Cupertino Miranda
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jose E. Marchesi @ 2024-01-03 10:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Cupertino Miranda; +Cc: binutils, nickc, elena.zannoni
Hi Cuper.
> Hi everyone,
>
> This patch is in context of Nick Cliftons request in thread:
> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2023-October/130194.html
> due to bug reported in:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2245296
>
> For the time being the linker is not used in BPF infrastructure.
> Considering that and without a proper way to validate the code, the
> following patch is what I think is missing in order to add linker
> support for the particular relocation.
>
> Looking forward to your review.
>
> Best regards,
> Cupertino
>
> This patch adds linker support to patch R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 relocations.
> The implementation was based on comments and code in LLVM, as the GNU
> toolchain does not uses this relocation type.
> ---
> bfd/elf64-bpf.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/bfd/elf64-bpf.c b/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
> index aefad7da5ac..5820dd3d7d4 100644
> --- a/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
> +++ b/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
> @@ -276,6 +276,7 @@ bpf_elf_relocate_section (bfd *output_bfd ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
> }
> case R_BPF_64_ABS64:
> case R_BPF_64_ABS32:
> + case R_BPF_64_NODYLD32:
I would add here a comment explaining that R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 shall be
handled/resolved like R_BPF_64_ABS32 and that it differs from ABS32 only
in that the LLVM execution engine is not supposed to resolve it.
Given that, the patch is OK.
Thanks!
> {
> addend = bfd_get (howto->bitsize, input_bfd, where);
> relocation += addend;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] bpf: Added linker support for R_BPF_64_NODYLD32.
2024-01-03 10:34 ` Jose E. Marchesi
@ 2024-01-08 10:16 ` Cupertino Miranda
2024-01-08 18:45 ` Jose E. Marchesi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Cupertino Miranda @ 2024-01-08 10:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jose E. Marchesi; +Cc: binutils, nickc, elena.zannoni
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 288 bytes --]
Hi Jose,
Thanks for your review.
I realized I missed to update the macro for the relocation where the
properties like size, overflow check, (etc.) are defined.
I have added the comment near the relocation macro definition.
Sending the patch for review once again.
Regards,
Cupertino
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: 0001-bpf-Added-linker-support-for-R_BPF_64_NODYLD32.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-diff, Size: 2137 bytes --]
From bb8afde9a8f17d42393067c3a667bec1f08b252a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Cupertino Miranda <cupertino.miranda@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2023 12:24:03 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] bpf: Added linker support for R_BPF_64_NODYLD32.
This patch adds linker support to patch R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 relocations.
The implementation was based on comments and code in LLVM, as the GNU
toolchain does not uses this relocation type.
---
bfd/bpf-reloc.def | 17 ++++++++++-------
bfd/elf64-bpf.c | 1 +
2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/bfd/bpf-reloc.def b/bfd/bpf-reloc.def
index 7e7497892fa..42ba1a169ea 100644
--- a/bfd/bpf-reloc.def
+++ b/bfd/bpf-reloc.def
@@ -90,17 +90,20 @@
/* R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 is not used by GNU tools - but it is generated by LLVM.
We provide an entry here so that tools like strip can safely handle BPF
- binaries generated by other tools. */
+ binaries generated by other tools.
+ R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 should be fixed at linker like a R_BPF_64_ABS32.
+ The difference to ABS32 is that LLVM execution engine does not resolve
+ R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 relocations. */
BPF_HOWTO (R_BPF_64_NODYLD32, /* type */
0, /* rightshift */
- 0, /* size */
- 0, /* bitsize */
+ 4, /* size */
+ 32, /* bitsize */
false, /* pc_relative */
0, /* bitpos */
- complain_overflow_dont, /* complain_on_overflow */
+ complain_overflow_bitfield, /* complain_on_overflow */
bpf_elf_generic_reloc, /* special_function */
"R_BPF_64_NODYLD32", /* name */
false, /* partial_inplace */
- 0, /* src_mask */
- 0, /* dst_mask */
- false) /* pcrel_offset */
+ 0xffffffff, /* src_mask */
+ 0xffffffff, /* dst_mask */
+ true) /* pcrel_offset */
diff --git a/bfd/elf64-bpf.c b/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
index c932a4024ba..0bffe2c5717 100644
--- a/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
+++ b/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
@@ -276,6 +276,7 @@ bpf_elf_relocate_section (bfd *output_bfd ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
}
case R_BPF_64_ABS64:
case R_BPF_64_ABS32:
+ case R_BPF_64_NODYLD32:
{
addend = bfd_get (howto->bitsize, input_bfd, where);
relocation += addend;
--
2.39.2
[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 1559 bytes --]
Jose E. Marchesi writes:
> Hi Cuper.
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> This patch is in context of Nick Cliftons request in thread:
>> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2023-October/130194.html
>> due to bug reported in:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2245296
>>
>> For the time being the linker is not used in BPF infrastructure.
>> Considering that and without a proper way to validate the code, the
>> following patch is what I think is missing in order to add linker
>> support for the particular relocation.
>>
>> Looking forward to your review.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Cupertino
>>
>> This patch adds linker support to patch R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 relocations.
>> The implementation was based on comments and code in LLVM, as the GNU
>> toolchain does not uses this relocation type.
>> ---
>> bfd/elf64-bpf.c | 1 +
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/bfd/elf64-bpf.c b/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
>> index aefad7da5ac..5820dd3d7d4 100644
>> --- a/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
>> +++ b/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
>> @@ -276,6 +276,7 @@ bpf_elf_relocate_section (bfd *output_bfd ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
>> }
>> case R_BPF_64_ABS64:
>> case R_BPF_64_ABS32:
>> + case R_BPF_64_NODYLD32:
>
> I would add here a comment explaining that R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 shall be
> handled/resolved like R_BPF_64_ABS32 and that it differs from ABS32 only
> in that the LLVM execution engine is not supposed to resolve it.
>
> Given that, the patch is OK.
> Thanks!
>
>> {
>> addend = bfd_get (howto->bitsize, input_bfd, where);
>> relocation += addend;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] bpf: Added linker support for R_BPF_64_NODYLD32.
2024-01-08 10:16 ` Cupertino Miranda
@ 2024-01-08 18:45 ` Jose E. Marchesi
2024-01-08 20:45 ` Cupertino Miranda
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jose E. Marchesi @ 2024-01-08 18:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Cupertino Miranda; +Cc: binutils, nickc, elena.zannoni
Hi Cuper.
OK, thanks.
> Hi Jose,
>
> Thanks for your review.
> I realized I missed to update the macro for the relocation where the
> properties like size, overflow check, (etc.) are defined.
> I have added the comment near the relocation macro definition.
>
> Sending the patch for review once again.
>
> Regards,
> Cupertino
>
> From bb8afde9a8f17d42393067c3a667bec1f08b252a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Cupertino Miranda <cupertino.miranda@oracle.com>
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2023 12:24:03 +0000
> Subject: [PATCH] bpf: Added linker support for R_BPF_64_NODYLD32.
>
> This patch adds linker support to patch R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 relocations.
> The implementation was based on comments and code in LLVM, as the GNU
> toolchain does not uses this relocation type.
> ---
> bfd/bpf-reloc.def | 17 ++++++++++-------
> bfd/elf64-bpf.c | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/bfd/bpf-reloc.def b/bfd/bpf-reloc.def
> index 7e7497892fa..42ba1a169ea 100644
> --- a/bfd/bpf-reloc.def
> +++ b/bfd/bpf-reloc.def
> @@ -90,17 +90,20 @@
>
> /* R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 is not used by GNU tools - but it is generated by LLVM.
> We provide an entry here so that tools like strip can safely handle BPF
> - binaries generated by other tools. */
> + binaries generated by other tools.
> + R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 should be fixed at linker like a R_BPF_64_ABS32.
> + The difference to ABS32 is that LLVM execution engine does not resolve
> + R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 relocations. */
> BPF_HOWTO (R_BPF_64_NODYLD32, /* type */
> 0, /* rightshift */
> - 0, /* size */
> - 0, /* bitsize */
> + 4, /* size */
> + 32, /* bitsize */
> false, /* pc_relative */
> 0, /* bitpos */
> - complain_overflow_dont, /* complain_on_overflow */
> + complain_overflow_bitfield, /* complain_on_overflow */
> bpf_elf_generic_reloc, /* special_function */
> "R_BPF_64_NODYLD32", /* name */
> false, /* partial_inplace */
> - 0, /* src_mask */
> - 0, /* dst_mask */
> - false) /* pcrel_offset */
> + 0xffffffff, /* src_mask */
> + 0xffffffff, /* dst_mask */
> + true) /* pcrel_offset */
> diff --git a/bfd/elf64-bpf.c b/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
> index c932a4024ba..0bffe2c5717 100644
> --- a/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
> +++ b/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
> @@ -276,6 +276,7 @@ bpf_elf_relocate_section (bfd *output_bfd ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
> }
> case R_BPF_64_ABS64:
> case R_BPF_64_ABS32:
> + case R_BPF_64_NODYLD32:
> {
> addend = bfd_get (howto->bitsize, input_bfd, where);
> relocation += addend;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] bpf: Added linker support for R_BPF_64_NODYLD32.
2024-01-08 18:45 ` Jose E. Marchesi
@ 2024-01-08 20:45 ` Cupertino Miranda
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Cupertino Miranda @ 2024-01-08 20:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jose E. Marchesi; +Cc: binutils, nickc, elena.zannoni
Thanks! Committed.
Jose E. Marchesi writes:
> Hi Cuper.
> OK, thanks.
>
>> Hi Jose,
>>
>> Thanks for your review.
>> I realized I missed to update the macro for the relocation where the
>> properties like size, overflow check, (etc.) are defined.
>> I have added the comment near the relocation macro definition.
>>
>> Sending the patch for review once again.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Cupertino
>>
>> From bb8afde9a8f17d42393067c3a667bec1f08b252a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Cupertino Miranda <cupertino.miranda@oracle.com>
>> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2023 12:24:03 +0000
>> Subject: [PATCH] bpf: Added linker support for R_BPF_64_NODYLD32.
>>
>> This patch adds linker support to patch R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 relocations.
>> The implementation was based on comments and code in LLVM, as the GNU
>> toolchain does not uses this relocation type.
>> ---
>> bfd/bpf-reloc.def | 17 ++++++++++-------
>> bfd/elf64-bpf.c | 1 +
>> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/bfd/bpf-reloc.def b/bfd/bpf-reloc.def
>> index 7e7497892fa..42ba1a169ea 100644
>> --- a/bfd/bpf-reloc.def
>> +++ b/bfd/bpf-reloc.def
>> @@ -90,17 +90,20 @@
>>
>> /* R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 is not used by GNU tools - but it is generated by LLVM.
>> We provide an entry here so that tools like strip can safely handle BPF
>> - binaries generated by other tools. */
>> + binaries generated by other tools.
>> + R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 should be fixed at linker like a R_BPF_64_ABS32.
>> + The difference to ABS32 is that LLVM execution engine does not resolve
>> + R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 relocations. */
>> BPF_HOWTO (R_BPF_64_NODYLD32, /* type */
>> 0, /* rightshift */
>> - 0, /* size */
>> - 0, /* bitsize */
>> + 4, /* size */
>> + 32, /* bitsize */
>> false, /* pc_relative */
>> 0, /* bitpos */
>> - complain_overflow_dont, /* complain_on_overflow */
>> + complain_overflow_bitfield, /* complain_on_overflow */
>> bpf_elf_generic_reloc, /* special_function */
>> "R_BPF_64_NODYLD32", /* name */
>> false, /* partial_inplace */
>> - 0, /* src_mask */
>> - 0, /* dst_mask */
>> - false) /* pcrel_offset */
>> + 0xffffffff, /* src_mask */
>> + 0xffffffff, /* dst_mask */
>> + true) /* pcrel_offset */
>> diff --git a/bfd/elf64-bpf.c b/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
>> index c932a4024ba..0bffe2c5717 100644
>> --- a/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
>> +++ b/bfd/elf64-bpf.c
>> @@ -276,6 +276,7 @@ bpf_elf_relocate_section (bfd *output_bfd ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
>> }
>> case R_BPF_64_ABS64:
>> case R_BPF_64_ABS32:
>> + case R_BPF_64_NODYLD32:
>> {
>> addend = bfd_get (howto->bitsize, input_bfd, where);
>> relocation += addend;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-01-08 20:45 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-12-20 13:23 [PATCH] bpf: Added linker support for R_BPF_64_NODYLD32 Cupertino Miranda
2024-01-03 10:34 ` Jose E. Marchesi
2024-01-08 10:16 ` Cupertino Miranda
2024-01-08 18:45 ` Jose E. Marchesi
2024-01-08 20:45 ` Cupertino Miranda
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 read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).