On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 12:15:09PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote: > On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 02:03:58AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > 2017-02-27 7:41 GMT+09:00 Tom Rini <[email protected]>: > > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 10:31:17AM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > c) I'm not convinced your math above is correct. images->ep is where we > > > were put in memory. This is what we should make sure is 2MiB aligned, > > > and then add to it the text_offset. And some quick testing with > > > CONFIG_ARM64_RANDOMIZE_TEXT_OFFSET enabled Images :) > > > > My intention is > > > > images->ep = (2MiB aligned base) + text_offset > > > > If this equation is met, the image is already placed at the bootable > > position. > > We can skip the relocation. > > > > Theoretically, we can not know the value of text_offset in advance > > (especially for CONFIG_ARM64_RANDOMIZE_TEXT_OFFSET). > > However, in practice, we know text_offset is 0x80000. Per the arm64 Image header, no particular value of text_offset should be assumed. Please do not assume a particular value It has always been the intent that bootloaders should read this, though this evidently wasn't very clear (and the bootwrapper set a bad example). I tried to clear this up with documentation updates (and the addition of ARM64_RANDOMIZE_TEXT_OFFSET). > > If we put the image at 2MiB aligned base, the relocation would > > always happen. > > Correct. But I honestly don't know if non-randomized text offset is the > common case people will optimize for or randomized for added security will be > the more common case. FWIW, the randomized text_offset is a bootloader debugging/testing feature, and there's no security aspect to it. It was added [1] as an additional to hint to bootloader authors that they must respect the text_offset field. Thanks, Mark. [1] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=da57a369d3bc5cd61db90f7e9555840381db9b09 _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
