Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2020 21:29:04 -0400
From: Rich Felker <>
To: Nicholas Piggin <>
Cc: Nicholas Piggin via Libc-alpha <>,
	Szabolcs Nagy <>,,,
Subject: Re: Powerpc Linux 'scv' system call ABI proposal take 2

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 10:27:58AM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> Excerpts from Szabolcs Nagy's message of April 16, 2020 7:58 pm:
> > * Nicholas Piggin via Libc-alpha <> [2020-04-16 10:16:54 +1000]:
> >> Well it would have to test HWCAP and patch in or branch to two 
> >> completely different sequences including register save/restores yes.
> >> You could have the same asm and matching clobbers to put the sequence
> >> inline and then you could patch the one sc/scv instruction I suppose.
> > 
> > how would that 'patch' work?
> > 
> > there are many reasons why you don't
> > want libc to write its .text
> I guess I don't know what I'm talking about when it comes to libraries. 
> Shame if there is no good way to load-time patch libc. It's orthogonal
> to the scv selection though -- if you don't patch you have to 
> conditional or indirect branch however you implement it.

Patched pages cannot be shared. The whole design of PIC and shared
libraries is that the code("text")/rodata is immutable and shared and
that only a minimal amount of data, packed tightly together (the GOT)
has to exist per-instance.

Also, allowing patching of executable pages is generally frowned upon
these days because W^X is a desirable hardening property.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.