From: Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>
To: Cary Coutant <ccoutant@gmail.com>
Cc: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
Binutils <binutils@sourceware.org>,
GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>,
gnu-gabi@sourceware.org, x86-64-abi <x86-64-abi@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: Add PT_GNU_PROPERTY to cover .note.gnu.property section
Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2018 00:00:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181212104449.GB62340@wildebeest.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJimCsGvEf5PF81n_-=M78UX81UY_stg_6_wMmYsM_kczOh3-w@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 09:58:30PM -0800, Cary Coutant wrote:
> > > I would strongly recommended to try harder to get consensus here. I do
> > > not want to be a in a situation were we revise ABI again two years from
> > > now.
> >
> > That is my hope. PT_GNU_PROPERTY is our consensus so far.
>
> As you might expect, I support this new program header. Ideally, I'd
> have liked to replace the input SHT_NOTE sections with
> SHT_GNU_PROPERTY sections and dispense with all the note section
> overhead, but I'll take this as a compromise.
Why can't we switch to SHT_GNU_PROPERTY? My fear with combining
PT_GNU_PROPERTY with SHT_NOTE is that it will be even more confusing
for tools. You will get some allocated SHT_NOTEs in a PT_NOTE segment
and others in this new PT_GNU_PROPERTY segment (or worse, you get
multiple segments with different types covering the same ranges).
Also I thought there was still a question whether any or all
newly proposed property features and flags are actually needed
as loadable segments. There is a clear overlap with the GNU
Attributes (which are non-loadable). I would like to see consensus
first on the new property format/flags and which are and which
aren't needed as loadable properties at runtime.
Cheers,
Mark
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-12-12 10:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-01 0:00 RFC: Linux gABI: Add a GNU_PROPERTY_BY_LINKER property H.J. Lu
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Florian Weimer
2018-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Cary Coutant
2018-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Florian Weimer
2018-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Cary Coutant
2018-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2018-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2018-01-01 0:00 ` RFC: Add PT_GNU_PROPERTY to cover .note.gnu.property section H.J. Lu
2018-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2018-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Florian Weimer
2018-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Cary Coutant
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Mark Wielaard [this message]
2018-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Cary Coutant
2018-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Szabolcs Nagy
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=20181212104449.GB62340@wildebeest.org \
--to=mark@klomp.org \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=ccoutant@gmail.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=gnu-gabi@sourceware.org \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=x86-64-abi@googlegroups.com \
/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).