Re: [PATCH] /proc/kcore: Update physical address for kcore ram and text

[Pratyush Anand]

Hi Dave,

On Wednesday 25 January 2017 11:59 AM, Dave Young wrote:
> Hi Pratyush
> On 01/25/17 at 10:14am, Pratyush Anand wrote:
> > Currently all the p_paddr of PT_LOAD headers are assigned to 0, which is
> > not true and could be misleading, since 0 is a valid physical address.
> I do not know the history of /proc/kcore, so a question is why the
> p_addr was set as 0, if there were some reasons and if this could cause
> some risk or breakage.

I do not know why it was 0, which is a valid physical address. But 
certainly, it might break some user space tools, and those need to be 
fixed. For example, see following code from kexec-tools

kexec/kexec-elf.c:build_mem_phdrs()

435                 if ((phdr->p_paddr + phdr->p_memsz) < phdr->p_paddr) {
436                         /* The memory address wraps */
437                         if (probe_debug) {
438                                 fprintf(stderr, "ELF address wrap 
around\n");
439                         }
440                         return -1;
441                 }

We do not need to perform above check for an invalid physical address.

I think, kexec-tools and makedumpfile will need fixup. I already have 
those fixup which will be sent upstream once this patch makes through.
Pro with this approach is that, it will help to calculate variable like 
page_offset, phys_base from PT_LOAD even when they are randomized and 
therefore will reduce many variable and version specific values in user 
space tools.

~Pratyush