On Tue, 2018-06-19 at 22:06 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 06/16/2018 11:45 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
The BPF ELF format has new relocation types R_BPF_64_64 and R_BPF_64_32.
The existing R_BPF_MAP_FD was an extension that never got implemented.
Remove it, because its constant conflicts with the official R_BPF_64_64.
Is there an ABI manual against which we could review this change?
The last change said that this was added to the Generic ABI
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.sco.com_developers_gabi_latest_contents.html&d=DwIFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=DA8e1B5r073vIqRrFz7MRA&m=vat1LaeLAQ_XbOs1SRdavOCV310jx4Ctku_6Jcq72HY&s=r5vE3J-yD5ebnpdq_d0AkFfNFzewdpXShVKSvBULDzc&e=>, but there is
no evidence of that.
Only the EM values are, since they are generic.
It just takes a while before they make it to the public website.
rth has an email from the maintainer though with the assigned value.
The relocation constants don't have a separate ABI manual
(because BPF isn't really a full blown architecture/abi).
Those are kept in sync between the projects handling BPF elf files
(which is this patch, which is a prerequisite for getting the same
constants into elfutils, because we see the glibc elf.h as the
master copy that holds all GNU/Linux ELF constants.)