public inbox for glibc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "stsp at users dot sourceforge.net" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org> To: glibc-bugs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug dynamic-link/30134] DT_AUDIT is ignored for dlopen()ed solib Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 07:28:39 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-30134-131-ErkrHn9B6v@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-30134-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30134 --- Comment #17 from Stas Sergeev <stsp at users dot sourceforge.net> --- Ah, I see your point. So basically you mean, while DT_AUDIT can well be supported for dlopen() right now, it may be slightly inconsistent with la_premap, as it would just skip it. Well, for my use-case this is definitely not a problem because my use-case is only applying auditing to dlmem(), not dlopen(). dlmem() is done later by the dlopen()'ed plugin. So for my case its perfectly fine. Whether it is a generic consistency problem or not, is hard to tell, as currently there is no la_premap so we can't take a look at how dl_main() would have supported it, be it there. :) But I do share your concern, especially since there was once that LD_PREFER_MAP_32BIT_EXE thing that likely didn't skip any objects. So if we are modelling that, then la_premap is something to think about for the implementer of DT_AUDIT support for dlopen(). But please note one more thing. I started dlload_audit_module() exactly because I am not a big believer in DT_AUDIT for dlopen(). DT_AUDIT for dlopen() is just an "escape" scenario. So maybe if we get dlload_audit_module() in, we can just close this? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-27 7:28 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2023-02-17 16:50 [Bug dynamic-link/30134] New: " stsp at users dot sourceforge.net 2023-02-17 19:48 ` [Bug dynamic-link/30134] " fweimer at redhat dot com 2023-02-18 1:17 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net 2023-02-18 1:44 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net 2023-02-20 11:00 ` fweimer at redhat dot com 2023-02-20 11:50 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net 2023-02-20 12:15 ` fweimer at redhat dot com 2023-02-20 12:56 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net 2023-02-23 15:58 ` janderson at rice dot edu 2023-02-23 16:02 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net 2023-02-26 16:00 ` janderson at rice dot edu 2023-02-26 16:12 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net 2023-02-26 16:55 ` janderson at rice dot edu 2023-02-26 17:09 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net 2023-02-26 21:45 ` janderson at rice dot edu 2023-02-27 6:03 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net 2023-02-27 6:57 ` janderson at rice dot edu 2023-02-27 7:28 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net [this message] 2023-02-27 8:16 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net 2023-02-27 8:27 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net
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=bug-30134-131-ErkrHn9B6v@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org \ --cc=glibc-bugs@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: linkBe 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).