From: Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>
To: Stafford Horne <shorne@gmail.com>,
GNU Binutils <binutils@sourceware.org>,
Nick Clifton via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Cc: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>,
Linux OpenRISC <linux-openrisc@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sim: or1k: Eliminate dangerous RWX load segments
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 16:13:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f9ee2f12-2ea5-625b-1485-ce9d05167ac3@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230819074518.2253226-1-shorne@gmail.com>
Hi Stafford Horne,
The simulator code is actually maintained by the GNU GDB project
rather than the GNU Binutils project, so I am redirecting this
email to the gdb-patches list.
> This fixes test failures caused by the new linker warning which report:
>
> ./ld/ld-new: warning: load.S.x has a LOAD segment with RWX permissions
>
> Fix this by splitting the linker MEMORY into ram and rom to avoid
> generating RWX sections. This required tests to be adjusted to fix
> issues with the move. Namely:
>
> - fpu tests: were incorrectly using l.ori with ha(anchor) which now
> that we pushed the anchor up in memory it exposes the bug. Update
> to used the correct l.movhi instruction instead.
> - adrp test: the test reports ram offset addresses, now that we have
> moved memory layout around a bit I adjusted the test output. Some
> padding is added before pi to show that the actual address of pi and
> the adrp page offset are not the same.
(It is nice to see that this new linker feature helped to detect these problems. :-)
> Bug: https://sourceware.org/PR29957
> ---
> sim/testsuite/or1k/adrp.S | 5 +++--
> sim/testsuite/or1k/fpu-unordered.S | 2 +-
> sim/testsuite/or1k/fpu64a32-unordered.S | 2 +-
> sim/testsuite/or1k/fpu64a32.S | 2 +-
> sim/testsuite/or1k/or1k-test.ld | 7 ++++---
> 5 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/sim/testsuite/or1k/adrp.S b/sim/testsuite/or1k/adrp.S
> index eaddcb03885..192324c698e 100644
> --- a/sim/testsuite/or1k/adrp.S
> +++ b/sim/testsuite/or1k/adrp.S
> @@ -17,9 +17,9 @@
>
> # mach: or1k
> # output: report(0x00002064);\n
> -# output: report(0x00012138);\n
> +# output: report(0x0001a008);\n
> # output: report(0x00002000);\n
> -# output: report(0x00012000);\n
> +# output: report(0x0001a000);\n
> # output: report(0x00002000);\n
> # output: report(0x00014000);\n
> # output: report(0x00000000);\n
> @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
> .section .data
> .org 0x10000
> .align 4
> +pad: .quad 0
> .type pi, @object
> .size pi, 4
> pi:
> diff --git a/sim/testsuite/or1k/fpu-unordered.S b/sim/testsuite/or1k/fpu-unordered.S
> index 624aa0fe05d..a89172e37af 100644
> --- a/sim/testsuite/or1k/fpu-unordered.S
> +++ b/sim/testsuite/or1k/fpu-unordered.S
> @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ start_tests:
> * r13 e as float
> * r16 nan as float
> */
> - l.ori r11, r0, ha(anchor)
> + l.movhi r11, ha(anchor)
> l.addi r11, r11, lo(anchor)
> l.lwz r12, 0(r11)
>
> diff --git a/sim/testsuite/or1k/fpu64a32-unordered.S b/sim/testsuite/or1k/fpu64a32-unordered.S
> index e0ae6e770d1..51d915e4e75 100644
> --- a/sim/testsuite/or1k/fpu64a32-unordered.S
> +++ b/sim/testsuite/or1k/fpu64a32-unordered.S
> @@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ start_tests:
> * r14,r15 e as double
> * r16,r17 nan as double
> */
> - l.ori r11, r0, ha(anchor)
> + l.movhi r11, ha(anchor)
> l.addi r11, r11, lo(anchor)
> l.lwz r12, 0(r11)
> l.lwz r13, 4(r11)
> diff --git a/sim/testsuite/or1k/fpu64a32.S b/sim/testsuite/or1k/fpu64a32.S
> index 71b72b7761c..6ea60b28cf2 100644
> --- a/sim/testsuite/or1k/fpu64a32.S
> +++ b/sim/testsuite/or1k/fpu64a32.S
> @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ start_tests:
> * r14,r15 e as double
> * r16,r17 a long long
> */
> - l.ori r11, r0, ha(anchor)
> + l.movhi r11, ha(anchor)
> l.addi r11, r11, lo(anchor)
> l.lwz r12, 0(r11)
> l.lwz r13, 4(r11)
> diff --git a/sim/testsuite/or1k/or1k-test.ld b/sim/testsuite/or1k/or1k-test.ld
> index f1535daeabd..c26ecaf3f23 100644
> --- a/sim/testsuite/or1k/or1k-test.ld
> +++ b/sim/testsuite/or1k/or1k-test.ld
> @@ -20,8 +20,9 @@ MEMORY
> /* The exception vectors actually start at 0x100, but if you specify
> that address here, the "--output-target binary" step will start from
> address 0 with the contents meant for address 0x100. */
> - exception_vectors : ORIGIN = 0 , LENGTH = 8K
> - ram : ORIGIN = 8K, LENGTH = 2M - 8K
> + exception_vectors : ORIGIN = 0 , LENGTH = 8K
> + rom : ORIGIN = 8K, LENGTH = 40K
> + ram : ORIGIN = 40K, LENGTH = 2M - 40K
> }
>
> SECTIONS
> @@ -37,7 +38,7 @@ SECTIONS
> *(.text.*)
> *(.rodata)
> *(.rodata.*)
> - } > ram
> + } > rom
>
> .data :
> {
parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-21 15:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
[parent not found: <20230819074518.2253226-1-shorne@gmail.com>]
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=f9ee2f12-2ea5-625b-1485-ce9d05167ac3@redhat.com \
--to=nickc@redhat.com \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=linux-openrisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shorne@gmail.com \
--cc=vapier@gentoo.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).