Re: [NEW-PATCH] exec: allow > 2GB executables to run on 64-bit systems
> Thanks Andi -- I just tested open_exec() w/O_LARGEFILE on an > i386 with a 2.5GB+ binary (mostly debuginfo), and it works as > expected. Interesting to note that the test binary couldn't > be compiled with i386 gcc, but it could be built with x86_64 > gcc -m32. I guess the i386 binutils or gcc don't use O_LARGEFILE. They probably just need to be rebuilt with -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -Andi > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [NEW-PATCH] exec: allow > 2GB executables to run on 64-bit systems
Andi Kleen wrote:
Since Dave didn't post an updated patch. This is how I think what
the patch should be. I also changed sys_uselib just to be complete.
Thanks Andi -- I just tested open_exec() w/O_LARGEFILE on an
i386 with a 2.5GB+ binary (mostly debuginfo), and it works as
expected. Interesting to note that the test binary couldn't
be compiled with i386 gcc, but it could be built with x86_64
gcc -m32.
Dave
Always use O_LARGEFILE for opening executables
This allows to use executables >2GB.
Based on a patch by Dave Anderson
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux-2.6.24-rc3/fs/exec.c
===
--- linux-2.6.24-rc3.orig/fs/exec.c
+++ linux-2.6.24-rc3/fs/exec.c
@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ asmlinkage long sys_uselib(const char __
if (error)
goto exit;
- file = nameidata_to_filp(, O_RDONLY);
+ file = nameidata_to_filp(, O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE);
error = PTR_ERR(file);
if (IS_ERR(file))
goto out;
@@ -658,7 +658,8 @@ struct file *open_exec(const char *name)
int err = vfs_permission(, MAY_EXEC);
file = ERR_PTR(err);
if (!err) {
- file = nameidata_to_filp(, O_RDONLY);
+ file = nameidata_to_filp(,
+ O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE);
if (!IS_ERR(file)) {
err = deny_write_access(file);
if (err) {
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[NEW-PATCH] exec: allow > 2GB executables to run on 64-bit systems
Since Dave didn't post an updated patch. This is how I think what
the patch should be. I also changed sys_uselib just to be complete.
Always use O_LARGEFILE for opening executables
This allows to use executables >2GB.
Based on a patch by Dave Anderson
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux-2.6.24-rc3/fs/exec.c
===
--- linux-2.6.24-rc3.orig/fs/exec.c
+++ linux-2.6.24-rc3/fs/exec.c
@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ asmlinkage long sys_uselib(const char __
if (error)
goto exit;
- file = nameidata_to_filp(, O_RDONLY);
+ file = nameidata_to_filp(, O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE);
error = PTR_ERR(file);
if (IS_ERR(file))
goto out;
@@ -658,7 +658,8 @@ struct file *open_exec(const char *name)
int err = vfs_permission(, MAY_EXEC);
file = ERR_PTR(err);
if (!err) {
- file = nameidata_to_filp(, O_RDONLY);
+ file = nameidata_to_filp(,
+ O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE);
if (!IS_ERR(file)) {
err = deny_write_access(file);
if (err) {
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[NEW-PATCH] exec: allow 2GB executables to run on 64-bit systems
Since Dave didn't post an updated patch. This is how I think what
the patch should be. I also changed sys_uselib just to be complete.
Always use O_LARGEFILE for opening executables
This allows to use executables 2GB.
Based on a patch by Dave Anderson
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: linux-2.6.24-rc3/fs/exec.c
===
--- linux-2.6.24-rc3.orig/fs/exec.c
+++ linux-2.6.24-rc3/fs/exec.c
@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ asmlinkage long sys_uselib(const char __
if (error)
goto exit;
- file = nameidata_to_filp(nd, O_RDONLY);
+ file = nameidata_to_filp(nd, O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE);
error = PTR_ERR(file);
if (IS_ERR(file))
goto out;
@@ -658,7 +658,8 @@ struct file *open_exec(const char *name)
int err = vfs_permission(nd, MAY_EXEC);
file = ERR_PTR(err);
if (!err) {
- file = nameidata_to_filp(nd, O_RDONLY);
+ file = nameidata_to_filp(nd,
+ O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE);
if (!IS_ERR(file)) {
err = deny_write_access(file);
if (err) {
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [NEW-PATCH] exec: allow 2GB executables to run on 64-bit systems
Andi Kleen wrote:
Since Dave didn't post an updated patch. This is how I think what
the patch should be. I also changed sys_uselib just to be complete.
Thanks Andi -- I just tested open_exec() w/O_LARGEFILE on an
i386 with a 2.5GB+ binary (mostly debuginfo), and it works as
expected. Interesting to note that the test binary couldn't
be compiled with i386 gcc, but it could be built with x86_64
gcc -m32.
Dave
Always use O_LARGEFILE for opening executables
This allows to use executables 2GB.
Based on a patch by Dave Anderson
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: linux-2.6.24-rc3/fs/exec.c
===
--- linux-2.6.24-rc3.orig/fs/exec.c
+++ linux-2.6.24-rc3/fs/exec.c
@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ asmlinkage long sys_uselib(const char __
if (error)
goto exit;
- file = nameidata_to_filp(nd, O_RDONLY);
+ file = nameidata_to_filp(nd, O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE);
error = PTR_ERR(file);
if (IS_ERR(file))
goto out;
@@ -658,7 +658,8 @@ struct file *open_exec(const char *name)
int err = vfs_permission(nd, MAY_EXEC);
file = ERR_PTR(err);
if (!err) {
- file = nameidata_to_filp(nd, O_RDONLY);
+ file = nameidata_to_filp(nd,
+ O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE);
if (!IS_ERR(file)) {
err = deny_write_access(file);
if (err) {
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [NEW-PATCH] exec: allow 2GB executables to run on 64-bit systems
Thanks Andi -- I just tested open_exec() w/O_LARGEFILE on an i386 with a 2.5GB+ binary (mostly debuginfo), and it works as expected. Interesting to note that the test binary couldn't be compiled with i386 gcc, but it could be built with x86_64 gcc -m32. I guess the i386 binutils or gcc don't use O_LARGEFILE. They probably just need to be rebuilt with -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -Andi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] exec: allow > 2GB executables to run on 64-bit systems
Andi Kleen wrote: I agree in theory. We've only seen instances on 64-bitters... I think that's because gcc does not support the medium/large code models for i386. Although in theory someone could create an executable with a large enough .data. -Andi Or perhaps huge debuginfo section(s)? The x86_64 instance had 2.5GB .debug_macinfo DWARF section. Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] exec: allow > 2GB executables to run on 64-bit systems
> I agree in theory. We've only seen instances on 64-bitters... I think that's because gcc does not support the medium/large code models for i386. Although in theory someone could create an executable with a large enough .data. -Andi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] exec: allow > 2GB executables to run on 64-bit systems
Andi Kleen wrote: Dave Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: When a executable that is greater than 2GB in size is attempted on a 64-bit system on a file system that calls, or uses generic_file_open() as its open handler, it fails with an EOVERFLOW erro. This patch adds a call to force_o_largefile() call in open_exec(), as done in sys_open() and sys_openat(). Wouldn't it be better to just always pass O_LARGEFILE unconditionally there? e.g. in theory a 2.5GB executable should work on i386 and binfmt_* shouldn't have any problems with a large file. That would simplify your patch. -Andi I agree in theory. We've only seen instances on 64-bitters... Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] exec: allow > 2GB executables to run on 64-bit systems
Dave Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > When a executable that is greater than 2GB in size is attempted on a 64-bit > system on a file system that calls, or uses generic_file_open() as its > open handler, it fails with an EOVERFLOW erro. This patch adds a call > to force_o_largefile() call in open_exec(), as done in sys_open() and > sys_openat(). Wouldn't it be better to just always pass O_LARGEFILE unconditionally there? e.g. in theory a 2.5GB executable should work on i386 and binfmt_* shouldn't have any problems with a large file. That would simplify your patch. -Andi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[PATCH] exec: allow > 2GB executables to run on 64-bit systems
When a executable that is greater than 2GB in size is attempted on a 64-bit
system on a file system that calls, or uses generic_file_open() as its
open handler, it fails with an EOVERFLOW erro. This patch adds a call
to force_o_largefile() call in open_exec(), as done in sys_open() and
sys_openat().
Signed-off-by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
--- linux-2.6.24-rc3/fs/exec.c.orig
+++ linux-2.6.24-rc3/fs/exec.c
@@ -658,7 +658,8 @@ struct file *open_exec(const char *name)
int err = vfs_permission(, MAY_EXEC);
file = ERR_PTR(err);
if (!err) {
- file = nameidata_to_filp(, O_RDONLY);
+ file = nameidata_to_filp(,
force_o_largefile() ?
+ O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE : O_RDONLY);
if (!IS_ERR(file)) {
err = deny_write_access(file);
if (err) {
[PATCH] exec: allow 2GB executables to run on 64-bit systems
When a executable that is greater than 2GB in size is attempted on a 64-bit
system on a file system that calls, or uses generic_file_open() as its
open handler, it fails with an EOVERFLOW erro. This patch adds a call
to force_o_largefile() call in open_exec(), as done in sys_open() and
sys_openat().
Signed-off-by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
--- linux-2.6.24-rc3/fs/exec.c.orig
+++ linux-2.6.24-rc3/fs/exec.c
@@ -658,7 +658,8 @@ struct file *open_exec(const char *name)
int err = vfs_permission(nd, MAY_EXEC);
file = ERR_PTR(err);
if (!err) {
- file = nameidata_to_filp(nd, O_RDONLY);
+ file = nameidata_to_filp(nd,
force_o_largefile() ?
+ O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE : O_RDONLY);
if (!IS_ERR(file)) {
err = deny_write_access(file);
if (err) {
Re: [PATCH] exec: allow 2GB executables to run on 64-bit systems
Dave Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When a executable that is greater than 2GB in size is attempted on a 64-bit system on a file system that calls, or uses generic_file_open() as its open handler, it fails with an EOVERFLOW erro. This patch adds a call to force_o_largefile() call in open_exec(), as done in sys_open() and sys_openat(). Wouldn't it be better to just always pass O_LARGEFILE unconditionally there? e.g. in theory a 2.5GB executable should work on i386 and binfmt_* shouldn't have any problems with a large file. That would simplify your patch. -Andi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] exec: allow 2GB executables to run on 64-bit systems
Andi Kleen wrote: I agree in theory. We've only seen instances on 64-bitters... I think that's because gcc does not support the medium/large code models for i386. Although in theory someone could create an executable with a large enough .data. -Andi Or perhaps huge debuginfo section(s)? The x86_64 instance had 2.5GB .debug_macinfo DWARF section. Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] exec: allow 2GB executables to run on 64-bit systems
I agree in theory. We've only seen instances on 64-bitters... I think that's because gcc does not support the medium/large code models for i386. Although in theory someone could create an executable with a large enough .data. -Andi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] exec: allow 2GB executables to run on 64-bit systems
Andi Kleen wrote: Dave Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When a executable that is greater than 2GB in size is attempted on a 64-bit system on a file system that calls, or uses generic_file_open() as its open handler, it fails with an EOVERFLOW erro. This patch adds a call to force_o_largefile() call in open_exec(), as done in sys_open() and sys_openat(). Wouldn't it be better to just always pass O_LARGEFILE unconditionally there? e.g. in theory a 2.5GB executable should work on i386 and binfmt_* shouldn't have any problems with a large file. That would simplify your patch. -Andi I agree in theory. We've only seen instances on 64-bitters... Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
