Messages in this thread | | | From | Greg Ungerer <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 04/15] binfmt_flat: remove flat_old_ram_flag | Date | Tue, 11 Jun 2019 23:07:36 +1000 |
| |
On 11/6/19 5:36 pm, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 04:04:39PM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote: >>> index c0e4535dc1ec..18d82fd5f57c 100644 >>> --- a/fs/binfmt_flat.c >>> +++ b/fs/binfmt_flat.c >>> @@ -488,7 +488,8 @@ static int load_flat_file(struct linux_binprm *bprm, >>> * fix up the flags for the older format, there were all kinds >>> * of endian hacks, this only works for the simple cases >>> */ >>> - if (rev == OLD_FLAT_VERSION && flat_old_ram_flag(flags)) >>> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BINFMT_FLAT_OLD_ALWAYS_RAM) && >>> + rev == OLD_FLAT_VERSION) >> >> The flags are from the binary file header here, so this is going to lose >> that check for most platforms (except h8300 where it would always have >> been true). > > Indeed. The old code is: > > if (rev == OLD_FLAT_VERSION && flat_old_ram_flag(flags)) > flags = FLAT_FLAG_RAM; > > which for !h8300 evaluates to: > > if (rev == OLD_FLAT_VERSION && flags) > flags = FLAT_FLAG_RAM; > > so basically if any flag was set it was turned into FLAT_FLAG_RAM. > Was that really intentional?
Probably not, looking at the flags. For the compressed flag it makes some sense. But I don't think many of the others need load to RAM behavior.
> I guess even if it wasn't the is no > point in changing this historic behavior now. > > So I guess what we could do it something like: > > if (rev == OLD_FLAT_VERSION && > (flags || IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BINFMT_FLAT_OLD_ALWAYS_RAM))) > flags = FLAT_FLAG_RAM;
Yeah, that to looks to preserve the old behavior.
Regards Greg
| |