Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 24 Jun 2019 14:32:00 +0200 | From | Jessica Yu <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH modules v2 0/2] Fix handling of exit unwinding sections (on ARM) |
| |
+++ Matthias Schiffer [21/06/19 14:35 +0200]: >On Fri, 2019-06-07 at 12:49 +0200, Matthias Schiffer wrote: >> For some time (050d18d1c651 "ARM: 8650/1: module: handle negative >> R_ARM_PREL31 addends correctly", v4.11+), building a kernel without >> CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD would lead to module loads failing on ARM >> systems with >> certain memory layouts, with messages like: >> >> imx_sdma: section 16 reloc 0 sym '': relocation 42 out of range >> (0x7f015260 -> 0xc0f5a5e8) >> >> (0x7f015260 is in the module load area, 0xc0f5a5e8 a regular vmalloc >> address; relocation 42 is R_ARM_PREL31) >> >> This is caused by relocatiosn in the .ARM.extab.exit.text and >> .ARM.exidx.exit.text sections referencing the .exit.text section. As >> the >> module loader will omit loading .exit.text without >> CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD, >> there will be relocations from loaded to unloaded sections; the >> resulting >> huge offsets trigger the sanity checks added in 050d18d1c651. >> >> IA64 might be affected by a similar issue - sections with names like >> .IA_64.unwind.exit.text and .IA_64.unwind_info.exit.text appear in >> the ld >> script - but I don't know much about that arch. >> >> Also, I'm not sure if this is stable-worthy - just enabling >> CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD should be a viable workaround on affected >> kernels. >> >> v2: Use __weak function as suggested by Jessica > >Hi Russell, > >this patch series is still waiting for your thoughts - in reponse to >v1, Jessica already offered to take it through her tree if you give >your Acked-by. > >Thanks, > >Matthias
Hi Matthias,
There doesn't seem to be any complaints and I think the patchset looks good, so I've taken it up the modules-next tree. Thanks!
Jessica
| |