From: Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>
To: Fangrui Song <maskray@google.com>,
"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
"Zhang, Annita" <annita.zhang@intel.com>
Cc: gnu-gabi <gnu-gabi@sourceware.org>, Binutils <binutils@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: binutils ld and new PT_GNU_PROPERTY segment
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2020 00:00:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dadc7c7f28171eae1fe537d0be4fa4fbdaf4eaab.camel@klomp.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200219023120.gvr4ajolbjbqcfix@google.com>
Hi,
On Tue, 2020-02-18 at 18:31 -0800, Fangrui Song wrote:
> From what I can see, neither the Linux kernel nor glibc uses
> PT_GNU_PROPERTY.
> glibc/sysdeps/x86/dl-prop.h parses PT_NOTE.
That is my impression too.
> I tend to agree with Cary
> (https://sourceware.org/ml/gnu-gabi/2018-q4/msg00036.html) that
> .note.gnu.property should have been designed as a different section
> type
> because its combining semantics are different from other notes
> (we could apply "Rules for Linking Unrecognized Sections" to all
> SHT_NOTE sections) but it is too late to change the section type.
Agreed.
> A separate segment type (PT_GNU_PROPERTY) looks fine to me.
> glibc should probably be updated to parse PT_GNU_PROPERTY instead.
I think it is confusing to now introduce a new segment type which
basically provides the same information as the PT_NOTE segement. It is
ill defined because it needs to be matched to a magic section name.
Which makes things harder for tools dealing with generic SHT_NOTE
sections (they would have to preserve the magic section name, might not
be able to merge notes, etc.)
> (Recently I read some ABI decisions and I noticed that I frequently see
> the term "it is too late". As a contributor of both lld and LLVM binary
> utilities (and the implementer of a bunch of GNU_PROPERTY changes), I
> hope that the LLVM community can be informed of such changes earlier. A
> lot of people are not subscribed to any of the mailing lists (recently I
> visit the archives from time to time).
Yeah, we really need to do a better job coordinating and communicating.
Even though I am trying to keep up with these lists I am often
surprised by changes like this which seem to have just been added to
binutils without trying to get consensus with other GNU/ELF tool
implementations about the precise semantics or whether a feature is
simply redundant with existing practice.
Cheers,
Mark
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-19 10:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-01 0:00 Mark Wielaard
2020-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2020-01-01 0:00 ` Fangrui Song via gnu-gabi
2020-01-01 0:00 ` Mark Wielaard [this message]
2020-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2020-01-01 0:00 ` Mark Wielaard
2020-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2020-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2020-01-01 0:00 ` Mark Wielaard
2020-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2020-01-01 0:00 ` Fangrui Song
2020-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2020-01-01 0:00 ` Mark Wielaard
2020-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2020-01-01 0:00 ` Mark Wielaard
2020-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2020-01-01 0:00 ` Fangrui Song
2020-01-01 0:00 ` H.J. Lu
2020-01-01 0:00 ` Mark Wielaard
2020-01-01 0:00 ` Fangrui Song
2020-04-01 8:46 ` Florian Weimer
2020-04-01 9:22 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-04-01 9:29 ` Florian Weimer
2020-04-01 10:10 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-04-01 10:21 ` Florian Weimer
2020-01-01 0:00 ` Zhang, Annita
2020-01-01 0:00 ` Mark Wielaard
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=dadc7c7f28171eae1fe537d0be4fa4fbdaf4eaab.camel@klomp.org \
--to=mark@klomp.org \
--cc=annita.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=gnu-gabi@sourceware.org \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=maskray@google.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).