weird ro mapping generate by

Carlos O'Donell
Wed Sep 15 12:13:00 GMT 2010

On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 8:03 PM, Mathieu Lacage
<> wrote:
> which gives us a base address of 0x30cf200000-0x00000030cf200000 = 0
> now, if I look at the second RW PT_LOAD mapping described in the elf
> file, its p_vaddr is 0x00000030cf483db8. Since the base address is
> zero, I should find the corresponding data in memory at the same
> address but the memory mappings generated by the dynamic loader is RO
> at this address (the third mapping).
> So, there are a couple of options:
>  - the loader has gone mad (unlikely)
>  - I don't understand something else
> I suspect that it's the latter so, I wonder if someone could enlighten
> me so that I understand why this memory mapping is ro and not rw.

The dynamic loader is a very special case. It is a static application
that is compiled PIC and relocates *portions* of itself into higher

I haven't looked at your particular question, but in general you need
mappings for:
* RO code
* RO constant data
* RW data
* unreadable/unwritable guard pages

The mapping list you posted doesn't look unreasonable.

Also, because the code is PIC it doesn't have to be placed at the
vaddr of the PT_LOAD, it can be placed anywhere and the relevant
relocations fixed accordingly.


More information about the Libc-help mailing list