From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36A30398B8A0 for ; Wed, 9 Jun 2021 15:18:26 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 36A30398B8A0 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C596011FB; Wed, 9 Jun 2021 08:18:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from arm.com (usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 74D153F73D; Wed, 9 Jun 2021 08:18:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 16:17:24 +0100 From: Dave Martin To: Mark Brown Cc: Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Szabolcs Nagy , Jeremy Linton , "H . J . Lu" , Yu-cheng Yu , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, libc-alpha@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] elf: Remove has_interp property from arch_adjust_elf_prot() Message-ID: <20210609151724.GM4187@arm.com> References: <20210604112450.13344-1-broonie@kernel.org> <20210604112450.13344-4-broonie@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210604112450.13344-4-broonie@kernel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, GIT_PATCH_0, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2021 15:18:27 -0000 On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 12:24:50PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > Since we have added an is_interp flag to arch_parse_elf_property() we can > drop the has_interp flag from arch_elf_adjust_prot(), the only user was > the arm64 code which no longer needs it and any future users will be able > to use arch_parse_elf_properties() to determine if an interpreter is in > use. So far so good, but can we also drop the has_interp argument from arch_parse_elf_properties()? Cross-check with Yu-Cheng Yu's series, but I don't see this being used any more (except for passthrough in binfmt_elf.c). Since we are treating the interpreter and main executable orthogonally to each other now, I don't think we should need a has_interp argument to pass knowledge between the interpreter and executable handling phases here. > > Signed-off-by: Mark Brown > --- > arch/arm64/kernel/process.c | 2 +- > fs/binfmt_elf.c | 2 +- > include/linux/elf.h | 4 ++-- > 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c > index f7fff4a4c99f..e51c4aa7e048 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c > @@ -742,7 +742,7 @@ asmlinkage void __sched arm64_preempt_schedule_irq(void) > > #ifdef CONFIG_BINFMT_ELF > int arch_elf_adjust_prot(int prot, const struct arch_elf_state *state, > - bool has_interp, bool is_interp) > + bool is_interp) > { > if (prot & PROT_EXEC) { > if (state->flags & ARM64_ELF_INTERP_BTI && is_interp) > diff --git a/fs/binfmt_elf.c b/fs/binfmt_elf.c > index 253ca9969345..1aba4e50e651 100644 > --- a/fs/binfmt_elf.c > +++ b/fs/binfmt_elf.c > @@ -580,7 +580,7 @@ static inline int make_prot(u32 p_flags, struct arch_elf_state *arch_state, > if (p_flags & PF_X) > prot |= PROT_EXEC; > > - return arch_elf_adjust_prot(prot, arch_state, has_interp, is_interp); > + return arch_elf_adjust_prot(prot, arch_state, is_interp); > } > > /* This is much more generalized than the library routine read function, > diff --git a/include/linux/elf.h b/include/linux/elf.h > index 1c45ecf29147..d8392531899d 100644 > --- a/include/linux/elf.h > +++ b/include/linux/elf.h > @@ -101,11 +101,11 @@ extern int arch_parse_elf_property(u32 type, const void *data, size_t datasz, > > #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAVE_ELF_PROT > int arch_elf_adjust_prot(int prot, const struct arch_elf_state *state, > - bool has_interp, bool is_interp); > + bool is_interp); > #else > static inline int arch_elf_adjust_prot(int prot, > const struct arch_elf_state *state, > - bool has_interp, bool is_interp) > + bool is_interp) [...] Otherwise, looks reasonable. Cheers ---Dave