On 10/07/2019 14:25, Will Deacon wrote:

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 02:04:52PM +0100, Vincenzo Frascino wrote:

quoted

Prior to the introduction of Unified vDSO support and compat layer for
vDSO on arm64, AT_SYSINFO_EHDR was not defined for compat tasks.
In the current implementation, AT_SYSINFO_EHDR is defined even if the
compat vdso layer is not built and this causes a regression in the
expected behavior of the ABI.

Restore the ABI behavior making sure that AT_SYSINFO_EHDR for compat
tasks is defined only when CONFIG_GENERIC_COMPAT_VDSO and
CONFIG_COMPAT_VDSO are enabled.

I think you could do a better job in the changelog of explaining what's
actually going on here. The problem seems to be that you're advertising
the presence of a non-existent vDSO to userspace.

quoted

Reported-by: John Stultz <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>
---
 arch/arm64/include/asm/elf.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/elf.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/elf.h
index 3c7037c6ba9b..b7992bb9d414 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/elf.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/elf.h

@@ -202,7 +202,7 @@ typedef compat_elf_greg_t		compat_elf_gregset_t[COMPAT_ELF_NGREG];
 ({									\
 	set_thread_flag(TIF_32BIT);					\
  })
-#ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_COMPAT_VDSO
+#if defined(CONFIG_COMPAT_VDSO) && defined(CONFIG_GENERIC_COMPAT_VDSO)

Can't this just be #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT_VDSO ?

Yes, I realized it after I pushed the patch that CONFIG_GENERIC_COMPAT_VDSO can
be removed. Posting v2 shortly.

John -- can you give this a whirl, please?

Cheers,

Will

-- 
Regards,
Vincenzo

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel