Re: [patch 17/26] Xen-paravirt_ops: Add nosegneg capability to thevsyscall page notes

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

Roland McGrath wrote:
> This should be:
>
> NOTE_KERNELCAP_BEGIN(1, 1)
> NOTE_KERNELCAP(0, "nosegneg")
> NOTE_KERNELCAP_END
>
> i.e. 1->0 in the "bit" member.  (Note the ld.so.conf.d file must have the
> matching bit number for ldconfig-based lookups to do the right thing.)
> Or else:
>
> NOTE_KERNELCAP_BEGIN(1, 2)
> NOTE_KERNELCAP(0, "nosegneg")
> NOTE_KERNELCAP_END
>
> i.e. 1->2 in the "mask" member.  (The mask value should be 1<<bit.)
>   

Thanks Roland.  I've never really understood this stuff, and I just
copied this cargo-cultishly.

I'm not quite sure what you're suggesting here though.  Do you mean one of:

NOTE_KERNELCAP_BEGIN(1, 1)
NOTE_KERNELCAP(0, "nosegneg")
NOTE_KERNELCAP_END

or

NOTE_KERNELCAP_BEGIN(1, 2)
NOTE_KERNELCAP(1, "nosegneg")
NOTE_KERNELCAP_END

is the correct thing to use?

> Some pre-release glibc's (before 2.4) had a bug in the code that parses
> this, and would crash parsing the correct note.  Using the wrong bit value
> with nonmatching mask worked around this.  IIRC, no glibc release ever
> included the buggy version of the code.  In nonbuggy glibc, the mismatched
> value causes the "nosegneg" to be omitted from the directory search (under
> LD_LIBRARY_PATH and default directories), though ldconfig-based lookups
> will work (the most common case).
>   

Are you saying that one of the corrected forms might cause old glibcs to
crash, or just ignore nosegneg?

    J

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/