Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 15 Oct 2011 15:39:23 +0300
From:      Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>
To:        Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@freebsd.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r226343 - head/sys/vm
Message-ID:  <20111015123923.GY1511@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
In-Reply-To: <93156F0C-A80A-4E60-8873-E6269D543973@xcllnt.net>
References:  <201110131620.p9DGKAM2022926@svn.freebsd.org> <20111013190943.GM1511@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <D6F3D623-23A5-4147-A439-746AD670DE14@xcllnt.net> <201110131707.14466.jhb@freebsd.org> <CC78FD86-8B14-49EE-A2AA-4B1EE186A4BB@xcllnt.net> <20111013225030.GA75054@zim.MIT.EDU> <20111014182443.GP1511@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <93156F0C-A80A-4E60-8873-E6269D543973@xcllnt.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--9ZjrzBJa11dyYld4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 02:35:15PM -0700, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>=20
> On Oct 14, 2011, at 11:24 AM, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> >>>=20
> > After more thought about the issue, I do not agree with you.
> > Elf specification says about the PF_R flag that only read permission
> > for the memory image of the segment is required, but read and execute
> > is allowed.
>=20
> The ELF specification does not contain CPU specifics. Those are
> always covered by processor supplements. Since this is very i386
> specific behaviour we're talking about, it's a non sequitur to
> use the generic ELF specification to argue a point in this
> respect.
This is not quite accurate. The ELF specification does contain the
CPU-specific bits for i386. But, the interpretation of the PF_R/PF_X
flags in the program header is described under the OS-specific section,
and not under the CPU-specific. That is, I am sure that the situation
shall be interpreted as the bug in the program.

>=20
>=20
> > I want to commit the following refinement:
>=20
> The patch is good.
Thanks, committed.

>=20
> > diff --git a/sys/kern/imgact_elf.c b/sys/kern/imgact_elf.c
> > index 669c652..9970386 100644
> > --- a/sys/kern/imgact_elf.c
> > +++ b/sys/kern/imgact_elf.c
> > @@ -118,11 +118,24 @@ static int elf_legacy_coredump =3D 0;
> > SYSCTL_INT(_debug, OID_AUTO, __elfN(legacy_coredump), CTLFLAG_RW,=20
> >     &elf_legacy_coredump, 0, "");
> >=20
> > -static int __elfN(nxstack) =3D 0;
> > +static int __elfN(nxstack) =3D
> > +#if defined(__amd64__) || defined(__powerpc__) /* both 64 and 32 bit */
> > +	1;
> > +#else
> > +	0;
> > +#endif
> > SYSCTL_INT(__CONCAT(_kern_elf, __ELF_WORD_SIZE), OID_AUTO,
> >     nxstack, CTLFLAG_RW, &__elfN(nxstack), 0,
> >     __XSTRING(__CONCAT(ELF, __ELF_WORD_SIZE)) ": enable non-executable =
stack");
>=20
> Please do not commit this change with the rest. It's
> not to the point. In fact, if you're changing it to
> the above, please add ia64 to the list as well.

Yes, sure. The inclusion of the chunk was a mistake.

--9ZjrzBJa11dyYld4
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAk6ZfvsACgkQC3+MBN1Mb4jpvgCgr4APjZvroXEDGuQRt6XODUdL
YcYAnAg/kUnRybhrmaUdtWqAq/NDa/vH
=1Bke
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--9ZjrzBJa11dyYld4--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20111015123923.GY1511>