ifunc resolving
Florian Weimer
fweimer@redhat.com
Wed Jan 20 09:33:40 GMT 2021
* Alan Modra via Libc-alpha:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 03:59:54PM +0100, Florian Weimer via Binutils wrote:
>> We have two positions that still need to be reconciled:
>>
>> * IFUNC resolvers must not themselves have relocation dependencies
>> because they can be called at any time during relocation. This
>> restricts the functionality available to an IFUNC resolver.
>
> On many architectures this cannot be achieved without hand-crafted
> assembly. The reason is obvious. Ifunc resolvers return an address.
> Compilers load addresses from the GOT, particularly for PIC. GOT
> entries need relocation.
Yes, this works best for what glibc considers PI_STATIC_AND_HIDDEN
architectures.
>
>> * IFUNC resolvers may have relocation dependencies, but they may only be
>> called after the object that contains them has been relocated. This
>> restricts how IFUNC symbols can be used (interposition is limited,
>> correct dependency ordering via DT_NEEDED is required).
>
> No interposition in practice, because the object doing the interposing
> is almost always relocated later.
Right, and that was hard for glibc.
>> I do not think we have ever achieved consensus which position is the
>> correct one.
>
> There is a third possibility. If ld.so defers all irelative and other
> relocations using ifunc symbols until all non-ifunc relocations have
> been performed, globally, then ifunc resolvers would only have the
> restriction that they not call other ifuncs.
>
> That idea was floated a very long time ago. For some reason it is
> too hard or too slow to do in ld.so.
It's not too hard, I wrote a patch. I didn't mention it because it was
rejected. It seemed about the only thing for which we had consensus. 8-/
My patch did not find an appropriate order in all cases. I think that's
more or less unavoidable if IFUNC resolvers depend on relocations
against other IFUNC resolvers. It would have nicely covered all
internal glibc uses at the time.
> If it's too hard for glibc itself, it's too hard for anyone to use
> anywhere.
Agreed, it's difficult to argue against that.
Thanks,
Florian
--
Red Hat GmbH, https://de.redhat.com/ , Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Brian Klemm, Laurie Krebs, Michael O'Neill
More information about the Libc-alpha
mailing list