search for: rosegment

--rosegment puts read-only data and executable text in a single segment and make it executable, so your read-only code becomes executable. I think that shouldn't be a default behavior. If valgrind needs that, we can't fix it by changing the default. On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 2:50 PM Andrew Kelley via llv...

As a frontend, what are the downsides of enabling --no-rosegment by default? So far the pro list is: * valgrind debug info will work by default What's on the con list? On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 5:16 PM, Shoaib Meenai <smeenai at fb.com> wrote: > It's more of a valgrind issue than an LLD issue, but you can work around > it by linking with --...

...39;t think of a reason that valgrind needs executable data segment. It is likely that valgrind assumes some specific segment layout that the GNU linker creates and can't handle other layout even if it is valid. On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 3:21 PM Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote: > --rosegment puts read-only data and executable text in a single segment > and make it executable, so your read-only code becomes executable. I think > that shouldn't be a default behavior. If valgrind needs that, we can't fix > it by changing the default. > > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 2:50...

Confirmed that -no-rosegment worked around the issue. However, a valgrind developer says that perhaps LLD is generating strange object files: <tomhughes> I suspect that is some extra ro segment in addition to the normal rodata <tomhughes> so without it you have two <tomhughes> but I know nothing about lld &...

It's more of a valgrind issue than an LLD issue, but you can work around it by linking with --no-rosegment From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> on behalf of Andrew Kelley via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Reply-To: Andrew Kelley <superjoe30 at gmail.com> Date: Thursday, April 5, 2018 at 2:14 PM To: LLVM Dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: [llvm-dev]...

I just filed https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37021 There was another bug that seems related to this which is https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35032 but that one is marked fixed. But this seems to be an issue in trunk. Is this a known issue? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

...eparate-code layout) You need to use --image-base=0 https://releases.llvm.org/10.0.0/tools/lld/docs/ReleaseNotes.html#breaking-changes On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 10:31 AM Moshtaghi, Alireza <Alireza.Moshtaghi at netapp.com> wrote: > > Actually it is the combination of -Ttext 0x0 and --no-rosegment that cause the problem. You can reproduce using any c file using following: > clang test.c -fuse-ld=lld -Wl,-Ttext,0x0 -Wl,--no-rosegment > > A > > On 11/16/20, 9:52 AM, "llvm-dev on behalf of Moshtaghi, Alireza via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org on behal...

...or whatever reason (e.g. less VM commit, finer granularity in VM maps, not wanting to have RO as writable even if for a short while.) So there's a trade-off to be made here (or an option to be added, even though we all want to avoid that if we can.) > > How to layout the segments if --no-rosegment is specified? > > One option is to keep the old layout if --no-rosegment is specified, the > other is: > > Old: RX RW(RELRO) RW > New: RX(R+RELRO+RX) RW; RX includes the traditional R part, the RELRO > part, and the RX part > Runtime (before relocation resolving): RW RX...

I can't send the exact objects, but I'll try to reproduce. Thanks A On 11/16/20, 9:48 AM, "Fāng-ruì Sòng" <maskray at google.com> wrote: NetApp Security WARNING: This is an external email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 9:05 AM Moshtaghi, Alireza

For those of you using Pound with Mongrel, the latest dev release allows for the single line certificate behaviour that Jeff wrote the patch for initially. I''ll update the wiki to make mention of it once we''ve been able to do some testing with it. On Feb 1, 2008 9:03 AM, Robert Segall <roseg@apsis.ch> wrote: > > On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 13:28 -0800, Nigel Kersten

Actually it is the combination of -Ttext 0x0 and --no-rosegment that cause the problem. You can reproduce using any c file using following: clang test.c -fuse-ld=lld -Wl,-Ttext,0x0 -Wl,--no-rosegment A On 11/16/20, 9:52 AM, "llvm-dev on behalf of Moshtaghi, Alireza via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org on behalf of llvm-dev at lists....

...> in > > order for it to have the same VM flags with the RELRO VMA so that they > can > > be merged. Specifically VM_ACCOUNT is set when a VMA is made writable. > > Same question. I hope you can give a bit more details. > > > > How to layout the segments if --no-rosegment is specified? > > > Runtime (before relocation resolving): RX RW ; some people may > be > > > concered with writable stuff (relocated part) being made executable > > Indeed I think weakening in the security aspect may be a problem if we > are > > to merge...

Hello Vic, I don't have a lot to add myself. I think that majority of the input needs to come from the OS stakeholders. My main concern is if it requires work on every platform to take advantage or avoid regressions then perhaps it is worth adding as an option rather than changing the default. Some questions: - Does this need work in every OS for correctness of programs? For example you

Hello all, The lld linker appears to generate extra ELF program headers and thus causes file sizes to be significantly larger than what would get with ld.gold or ld.bfd. # readelf -l test.bfd Elf file type is EXEC (Executable file) Entry point 0x4000b0 There are 2 program headers, starting at offset 64 Program Headers: Type Offset VirtAddr PhysAddr