From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D06B63858D28 for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2021 20:37:23 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org D06B63858D28 Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-500-JthKwiztMRyrZrW_5IMbsw-1; Mon, 06 Dec 2021 15:37:20 -0500 X-MC-Unique: JthKwiztMRyrZrW_5IMbsw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 884FA874985; Mon, 6 Dec 2021 20:37:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (unknown [10.39.193.123]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED54360843; Mon, 6 Dec 2021 20:37:17 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Adhemerval Zanella Cc: "H.J. Lu" , GNU C Library Subject: Re: [PATCH] elf: Add elf checks for main executable References: <20211119150329.2200675-1-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <87bl1tmtxz.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <873a6969-8c06-5233-2b4c-48360e120f07@linaro.org> Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2021 21:37:15 +0100 In-Reply-To: <873a6969-8c06-5233-2b4c-48360e120f07@linaro.org> (Adhemerval Zanella's message of "Mon, 6 Dec 2021 17:31:27 -0300") Message-ID: <877dchlbb8.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) 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: Mon, 06 Dec 2021 20:37:25 -0000 * Adhemerval Zanella: > On 06/12/2021 16:22, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 11:09 AM Florian Weimer wrote: >>> >>> * Adhemerval Zanella: >>> >>>> +static void >>>> +modify_abiversion (ElfW(Ehdr) *ehdr) >>>> +{ >>>> + ehdr->e_ident[EI_ABIVERSION] = LIBC_ABI_MAX; >>>> +} >>> >>> So this is eventually controlled by the libc-abis file, right? >>> >>> I *thought* that the consensus was that binutils should bump version if >>> absolute symbols are used. But I don't see that in the absolute symbol >>> tests. >>> >>> Is this really doing anything? >>> >> >> EI_ABIVERSION check works on executables created by the new linker >> which bumps EI_ABIVERSION. This complements the existing >> EI_ABIVERSION check on DSOs. This is orthogonal to the ABI version >> check for existing ld.so binaries which needs an ABIVERSION version. >> > > Currently only mips does actually set and checks different EI_ABIVERSION > through VALID_ELF_ABIVERSION. For instance, -Wl,--hash-style=gnu with > mips64 will set EI_ABIVERSION to 5. What surprised me is that binutils does not seem to *generate* the bump for ABSOLUTE. Not so much the lack of checking in glibc. Thanks, Florian