https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31795
Fangrui Song <i at maskray dot me> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
CC| |i at maskray dot me
Resolution|FIXED |---
--- Comment #37 from Fangrui Song <i at maskray dot me> ---
I agree with mintsuki . The "-pie -Ttext-segment=non-zero => ET_EXEC" hack
should not be needed.
>From https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2013-December/083381.html
> Linker sets e_type in ELF header to ET_DYN for -pie -Ttext-segment=0xXXX.
> When I added -Ttext-segment=0xXXX, one goal was to load
> small model executable above 4GB on Linux/x86-64, which
> was done with -pie -Ttext-segment=0xXXX. But -pie sets
> e_type in ELF header to ET_DYN and kernel may ignore
> p_vaddr in ELF header to load ET_DYN binary at a random
> address. This patch changes ld to set e_type in ELF header
> to ET_EXEC if the first PT_LOAD segment has non-zero
> p_vaddr. If this is unacceptable as generic ELF change,
> I can make it specific to x86.
Was the intention for the following command to load the text segment at an
address >= 0x600000000000 ?
```
% cat a.c
#include <stdio.h>
int main() { printf("%p\n", main); }
% gcc -pie -Wl,-no-pie a.c -fuse-ld=bfd
-Wl,--no-relax,-Ttext-segment=0x600000000000 -o a
% ./a
0x600000001139
% ./a
0x600000001139 # no ASLR
```
Changing ET_DYN to ET_EXEC fulfills the address requirement but disables ASLR.
Is it intentional?
I added `--no-pie` to GNU ld in 2021:
https://sourceware.org/cgit/binutils-gdb/commit/?id=e8f6c2a5bab10b039a12b69a30a8248c91161e11
, with which we can do the following instead. (GNU ld also needs `--no-relax`
while lld doesn't).
```
% gcc -pie a.c -fuse-ld=bfd
-Wl,--no-pie,--no-relax,-Ttext-segment=0x600000000000 -o a
% ./a
0x600000001139
% ./a
0x600000001139
```
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
