This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Remove divide from _ELF_DYNAMIC_DO_RELOC


On 07/15/2014 01:53 AM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
> Hi Carlos, thanks for the review, and sorry about the long delay to reply.
> 
> On 14/5/23 9:59 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> On 04/11/2014 05:37 AM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
>>> 2014-04-11  Chung-Lin Tang  <cltang@codesourcery.com>
>>>
>>> 	* elf/dynamic-link.h (_ELF_DYNAMIC_DO_RELOC): Remove MIN() and
>>> 	assign raw DT_REL[A]COUNT value to ranges[0].nrelative.

OK to checkin.

>>> diff --git a/elf/dynamic-link.h b/elf/dynamic-link.h
>>> index 7b3e295..34ef88a 100644
>>> --- a/elf/dynamic-link.h
>>> +++ b/elf/dynamic-link.h
>>> @@ -122,8 +122,7 @@ elf_machine_lazy_rel (struct link_map *map,
>>>  	ranges[0].size = (map)->l_info[DT_##RELOC##SZ]->d_un.d_val;	      \
>>>  	if (map->l_info[VERSYMIDX (DT_##RELOC##COUNT)] != NULL)		      \
>>>  	  ranges[0].nrelative						      \
>>> -	    = MIN (map->l_info[VERSYMIDX (DT_##RELOC##COUNT)]->d_un.d_val,    \
>>> -		   ranges[0].size / sizeof (ElfW(reloc)));		      \
>>> +	    = map->l_info[VERSYMIDX (DT_##RELOC##COUNT)]->d_un.d_val;	      \

I want to note that the resulting code is less robust against binutils
bugs where the COUNT is more than the number of relocations in the list.
However I would rather this fail here quickly than magically select
DT_RELSZ/sizeof(ElfW(reloc)) as some random fallback e.g. all the relocs
are relative.

>>>        }									      \
>>>      if ((map)->l_info[DT_PLTREL]					      \
>>>  	&& (!test_rel || (map)->l_info[DT_PLTREL]->d_un.d_val == DT_##RELOC)) \
>>
>> Please add a top-level comment saying that 'COUNT', when present, overrides the
>> use of 'SZ' to compute the size of the range.
> 
> When 'COUNT' is not present, nrelative seems to be simply initialized as
> zero. I don't think it has to do with range here.

You are correct, I incorrectly remembered the purpose of DT_RELCOUNT which is
to handle the combined R_*_RELATIVE relocations more optimally in one block.

>> OK with that.
>>
>> Should we assert if SZ/sizeof(ElfW(reloc)) != COUNT?
> 
> Please, please don't introduce another divide, defeating my original
> purpose...

Given that I incorrectly remembered by DT_RELCOUNT was for this recommendation
is not correct anyway.

Therefore your patch as-is can be checked in. Please ask Allan McRae for permission
since this is a freeze period and we are fixing bugs, documentation and other things.

Cheers,
Carlos.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]