This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFC: adding Linux vsyscall-disable and similar backwards-incompatibility flags to ELF headers?
- From: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- To: Andy Lutomirski <luto at amacapital dot net>
- Cc: Kees Cook <keescook at chromium dot org>, "linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org" <linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org>, libc-alpha <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, "musl at lists dot openwall dot com" <musl at lists dot openwall dot com>, GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 18:12:12 -0700
- Subject: Re: RFC: adding Linux vsyscall-disable and similar backwards-incompatibility flags to ELF headers?
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CALCETrUzU5UVe_2eWuMCOgHTs=5mnor5m0RO0STTi3K5FzdNvQ at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Andy Lutomirski <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Linux has a handful of weird features that are only supported for
> backwards compatibility. The big one is the x86_64 vsyscall page, but
> uselib probably belongs on the list, too, and we might end up with
> more at some point.
> I'd like to add a way that new programs can turn these features off.
> In particular, I want the vsyscall page to be completely gone from the
> perspective of any new enough program. This is straightforward if we
> add a system call to ask for the vsyscall page to be disabled, but I'm
> wondering if we can come up with a non-syscall way to do it.
> I think that the ideal behavior would be that anything linked against
> a sufficiently new libc would be detected, but I don't see a good way
> to do that using existing toolchain features.
> Ideas? We could add a new phdr for this, but then we'd need to play
> linker script games, and I'm not sure that could be done in a clean,
> extensible way.
What sets up the vsyscall page, and what information does it have
before doing so?
I'm guessing it's the kernel that sets it up, and that all it can see
at that point is the program headers.
We could pass information using an appropriate note section. My
recollection is that the linkers will turn an SHF_ALLOC note section
into a PT_NOTE program header.