Re: RFC: bug in load_elf_binary?

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...>
Cc: <linux-kernel@...>, Andi Kleen <ak@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...>, <bapper@...>, <aaw@...>
Date: Thursday, September 13, 2007 - 7:25 pm

Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:

I believe that's correct.  It's basically the equivalent of BSS, but 
used for an emulated OS (the app in question is an emulator).


Interesting idea.  Worth a try.

However, this doesn't address the kernel side of things.  Am I correct 
in thinking that the kernel is making an invalid assumption that it can 
find the load_addr based on the first segment?


Our emulated OS wants to put stuff at fixed addresses in this range, so 
we're trying to keep the loader from allocating stuff there before our 
program gets a chance to start up.

Chris
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
RFC: possible bug in load_elf_binary, Chris Friesen, (Mon Sep 10, 5:28 pm)
RFC: bug in load_elf_binary?, Chris Friesen, (Wed Sep 12, 2:36 pm)
Re: RFC: bug in load_elf_binary?, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Thu Sep 13, 6:00 pm)
Re: RFC: bug in load_elf_binary?, Chris Friesen, (Thu Sep 13, 7:25 pm)
Re: RFC: bug in load_elf_binary?, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Fri Sep 14, 2:21 pm)