linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Adding(?) XI support to MIPS-Linux?

To: "Kevin D. Kissell" <KevinK@paralogos.com>
Subject: Re: Adding(?) XI support to MIPS-Linux?
From: Thiemo Seufer <ths@networkno.de>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 21:46:27 +0100
Cc: Brian Foster <brian.foster@innova-card.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Andrew Dyer <adyer@righthandtech.com>
In-reply-to: <484D856B.5030306@paralogos.com>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <200806091658.10937.brian.foster@innova-card.com> <a537dd660806090837i5ef6c1e2k167aeb97785a136d@mail.gmail.com> <484D856B.5030306@paralogos.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Kevin D. Kissell wrote:
[snip]
>>  Broadly, what I'm trying to say is I don't want to touch gcc
>>  (and/or binutils) and am unconvinced I have to.  But I'm very
>>  much open to correction here!
>>
>>  The x86 (including amd64) and, AFAIK, SuperH (sh) Linux kernels
>>  now support NX or equivalent; indeed, a test on my 2.6.22(-ish)
>>  amd64 workstation (Kubuntu 7.10) has a non-executable stack.
>>  As such, those could be a model worth studying/following, but
>>  I understand they have support for specially-marked binaries to
>>  have executable stacks (i.e., binutils/gcc mods, which I want to
>>  avoid).
> Well, strictly speaking, you wouldn't actually *need* to modify binutils
> to make specially tagged binaries.  You could borrow an unused bit in
> the ELF header somewhere, have the kernel recognize it, and write your
> own little tool that only turns that bit on/off in an ELF file.

This exists already in ld's -z execstack/noexecstack feature. It is
not used by default because too many things depend on executable
stacks on MIPS.


Thiemo

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