From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761420AbYBEVS6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:18:58 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756854AbYBEVSu (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:18:50 -0500 Received: from pasmtpa.tele.dk ([80.160.77.114]:57300 "EHLO pasmtpA.tele.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755793AbYBEVSt (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:18:49 -0500 Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 22:18:54 +0100 From: Sam Ravnborg To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Ingo Molnar , Linus Torvalds , Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [git pull] x86 updates Message-ID: <20080205211854.GB27589@uranus.ravnborg.org> References: <20080204161219.GA8092@elte.hu> <20080205192236.GA26426@uranus.ravnborg.org> <20080205210508.GA14708@elte.hu> <47A8D088.7050209@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47A8D088.7050209@zytor.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 01:09:28PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > >btw., what's the practical consequence of getting these section flags > >wrong - for example writable data can end up in executable section > >accidentally and be marked readonly by RODATA? Or can anything more > >serious happen? (they cannot get into any of the discarded sections, we > >filter for them explicitly in the linker scripts) > > > > The practical consequences are probably zero - *except* for getting the > "a" flag wrong, as !a sections will never be loaded. > > Technically we should also specify @progbits or @nobits on sections, > however, I think @progbits is the default. I have on my todo list to do so. But I wanted to investigate a bit more since I do not yet fully understand the difference. And we have to use %progbits and %nobits as ARM uses '"' to indicate comments. Sam