linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 2.4 kernels + >=binutils-2.14.90.0.8

To: Kumba <kumba@gentoo.org>
Subject: Re: 2.4 kernels + >=binutils-2.14.90.0.8
From: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 05:09:19 +0100
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <404D1909.1020005@gentoo.org>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <404D0132.3020202@gentoo.org> <20040308234450.GF16163@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> <404D0A18.6050802@gentoo.org> <20040309003447.GH16163@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> <404D1909.1020005@gentoo.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 08:08:25PM -0500, Kumba wrote:

> Hmm, well, The readelf -l and -S output from a 2.14.90.0.7-based 
> cross-compiler is attached, along with -l & -S outout from the 
> 2.15.90.0.1.1 (--version reports 2.15.90.0.1) as well for comparison.
> 
> The PAX_FLAGS bit comes from a patch added in gentoo for PaX support in 
> binaries.  More info on PaX is at http://pax.grsecurity.net.  I'm going 
> to rebuild my kernel cross-compiler without that one patch and see what 
> the results are.

PAX can't be fully supported on MIPS anyway; the architecture doesn't
have a no-exec flag in it's pages.

PAX docs are bullshit btw.  execution proection doesn't require a split TLB
and anyway, the MIPS uTLBs are split.

  Ralf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>