| Message ID | 1454346154-12931-1-git-send-email-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Monday 01 February 2016 18:02:34 Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > When building an XIP kernel, the linker produces two disjoint VMA regions, > where the first is mapped onto ROM and the second onto RAM. For this reason, > the linker output pointer '.' is updated halfway through the linker script, > and set to a value that corresponds with the start of the RAM region. > > However, in some cases, the ROM region exceeds the expected size, and the > assignment of the output pointer results in a decrement rather than an > increment, causing the virtual addresses of the .data region to clash with > the .text region. Such a kernel cannot boot normally, but it also confuses > the hell out of kallsyms, since .data symbols may appear inside the > [_stext, _etext] or [_sinittext, _einittext] intervals in the first pass, > but not in the second (or vice versa), resulting in inconsistent kallsyms > data. > > So let's make sure that the output pointer only advances, and never jumps > back into the ROM region. > > Cc: arnd@arndb.de > Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> I've tested this in multiple configurations, and it reliably prints a useful error message in broken configurations, while it has no effect on working configurations. This is more helpful than the mysterious Inconsistent kallsyms data Try make KALLSYMS_EXTRA_PASS=1 as a workaround message that we get without the patch. Arnd _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 06:02:34PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > When building an XIP kernel, the linker produces two disjoint VMA regions, > where the first is mapped onto ROM and the second onto RAM. For this reason, > the linker output pointer '.' is updated halfway through the linker script, > and set to a value that corresponds with the start of the RAM region. > > However, in some cases, the ROM region exceeds the expected size, and the > assignment of the output pointer results in a decrement rather than an > increment, causing the virtual addresses of the .data region to clash with > the .text region. Such a kernel cannot boot normally, but it also confuses > the hell out of kallsyms, since .data symbols may appear inside the > [_stext, _etext] or [_sinittext, _einittext] intervals in the first pass, > but not in the second (or vice versa), resulting in inconsistent kallsyms > data. > > So let's make sure that the output pointer only advances, and never jumps > back into the ROM region. The long term goal is to move the XIP stuff out of this file, so I think it's better to avoid touching this until the split has happened. I'd _much_ rather see the split happen first, and then fixes applied, rather than trying to fix the existing unmaintainable mess. -- RMK's Patch system: http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 4:31 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 06:02:34PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >> When building an XIP kernel, the linker produces two disjoint VMA regions, >> where the first is mapped onto ROM and the second onto RAM. For this reason, >> the linker output pointer '.' is updated halfway through the linker script, >> and set to a value that corresponds with the start of the RAM region. >> >> However, in some cases, the ROM region exceeds the expected size, and the >> assignment of the output pointer results in a decrement rather than an >> increment, causing the virtual addresses of the .data region to clash with >> the .text region. Such a kernel cannot boot normally, but it also confuses >> the hell out of kallsyms, since .data symbols may appear inside the >> [_stext, _etext] or [_sinittext, _einittext] intervals in the first pass, >> but not in the second (or vice versa), resulting in inconsistent kallsyms >> data. >> >> So let's make sure that the output pointer only advances, and never jumps >> back into the ROM region. > > The long term goal is to move the XIP stuff out of this file, so > I think it's better to avoid touching this until the split has > happened. > > I'd _much_ rather see the split happen first, and then fixes > applied, rather than trying to fix the existing unmaintainable > mess. Is that split being actively worked on? If so by whom? _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
> > The long term goal is to move the XIP stuff out of this file, so I > > think it's better to avoid touching this until the split has happened. > > > > I'd _much_ rather see the split happen first, and then fixes applied, > > rather than trying to fix the existing unmaintainable mess. > > Is that split being actively worked on? If so by whom? I submitted "[PATCH v2] ARM: xip: Move XIP linking to a separate file" back in November which seemed pretty straight forward. Although, it didn't make it too far (other than Nicolas acking it) Chris _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016, Chris Brandt wrote: > > > The long term goal is to move the XIP stuff out of this file, so I > > > think it's better to avoid touching this until the split has happened. > > > > > > I'd _much_ rather see the split happen first, and then fixes applied, > > > rather than trying to fix the existing unmaintainable mess. > > > > Is that split being actively worked on? If so by whom? > > I submitted "[PATCH v2] ARM: xip: Move XIP linking to a separate file" back in November which seemed pretty straight forward. > > Although, it didn't make it too far (other than Nicolas acking it) For your ARM patches to be merged upstream, once you feel they've received sufficient review on the list, you then have to submit them here: http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/patches/ Nicolas _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S b/arch/arm/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S index 8b60fde5ce48..950114d533e1 100644 --- a/arch/arm/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S @@ -229,6 +229,7 @@ SECTIONS #ifdef CONFIG_XIP_KERNEL __data_loc = ALIGN(4); /* location in binary */ + ASSERT(. < PAGE_OFFSET + TEXT_OFFSET, "XIP_KERNEL: ROM and RAM overlap") . = PAGE_OFFSET + TEXT_OFFSET; #else #ifdef CONFIG_ARM_KERNMEM_PERMS
When building an XIP kernel, the linker produces two disjoint VMA regions, where the first is mapped onto ROM and the second onto RAM. For this reason, the linker output pointer '.' is updated halfway through the linker script, and set to a value that corresponds with the start of the RAM region. However, in some cases, the ROM region exceeds the expected size, and the assignment of the output pointer results in a decrement rather than an increment, causing the virtual addresses of the .data region to clash with the .text region. Such a kernel cannot boot normally, but it also confuses the hell out of kallsyms, since .data symbols may appear inside the [_stext, _etext] or [_sinittext, _einittext] intervals in the first pass, but not in the second (or vice versa), resulting in inconsistent kallsyms data. So let's make sure that the output pointer only advances, and never jumps back into the ROM region. Cc: arnd@arndb.de Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> --- arch/arm/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) -- 2.5.0 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel