public inbox for binutils@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Max Larsson <max.larsson@gmx.de>
To: Max Larsson via Binutils <binutils@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: Overlapping program headers/segments
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2023 09:25:47 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGKMySXiG35U14L+RD8jJtBV88LvCDMk0OujxqNNYpTcP-O3mA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mvmzg1asojk.fsf@suse.de>

> You didn't provide the linker script, which may have the observed effect together
> with your code change: If it puts .text and .rodata together, then the overlap is
> to be expected (as would frequently happen for NOTE segments and .note sections),
> I think.

Forget to mention. I using a slight modified elf.sc script, but even
using the plain elf.sc linker
script gives me overlapping  segments. But i think i found the
issue/solution. Read below.

>> So my question why do I get such a result, and how can I avoid it?
>
> If you want to avoid the overlap you need to provide enough padding
> between TEXT and RODATA.  See the handling of SEPARATE_CODE in
> scripttempl/elf.sc.

I tried that, but it doesn't give me the desired result. I need more a
result delivered
be enabling WRITABLE_RODATA. But a writable .rodata section isn't
liked as primer
solution. It's a possible the backup plan.

Nevertheless your hint with SEPARATE_CODE did lead to a solution, even
if I  cannot
reconstruct how i got there.
As mention I copied the solution from
elfxx-mips.c:_bfd_mips_elf_modify_segment_map to
put the .rodata section in its own segment. What I wondered about was
that the code
just looks for the section and just puts it in a new segment, but it
did not remove the section
from the origin segment.

Now I copied the code and adopted it from elf32-spu.c:
spu_elf_modify_segment_map, which not only put the section in its own
segment but
even removes it from the origin segment. Doing so gives me no
overlapping segments.

Thus the code I used in the first place may not have used the internal
data structures in the "correct"
way, leaving a section somehow in two segments, which gives wrong
calculated addresses and offsets?

Anyway thanks for the help.

kind regards

Max



On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 9:24 AM Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> wrote:
>
> On Sep 24 2023, Max Larsson via Binutils wrote:
>
> > So my question why do I get such a result, and how can I avoid it?
>
> If you want to avoid the overlap you need to provide enough padding
> between TEXT and RODATA.  See the handling of SEPARATE_CODE in
> scripttempl/elf.sc.
>
> --
> Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
> GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE  1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7
> "And now for something completely different."

      reply	other threads:[~2023-09-28  7:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-09-24 18:32 Max Larsson
2023-09-25  6:14 ` Jan Beulich
2023-09-25  7:24 ` Andreas Schwab
2023-09-28  7:25   ` Max Larsson [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAGKMySXiG35U14L+RD8jJtBV88LvCDMk0OujxqNNYpTcP-O3mA@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=max.larsson@gmx.de \
    --cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).