Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Reserve relocation codes for PAuthABI #78

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

smithp35
Copy link
Contributor

@smithp35 smithp35 commented Mar 1, 2021

The Alpha PAuthABI defines a small number of static and dynamic relocations
in the private vendor experiment space. When an upstream implementation
lands we will want to use non-experimental codes. Step 1 is to reserve
a range of static and dynamic relocations in AAELF64 so we can guarantee
no clash with any relocations defined in the PAuthABI.

The Alpha PAuthABI defines a small number of static and dynamic relocations
in the private vendor experiment space. When an upstream implementation
lands we will want to use non-experimental codes. Step 1 is to reserve
a range of static and dynamic relocations in AAELF64 so we can guarantee
no clash with any relocations defined in the PAuthABI.
PAuthABI relocations
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The PAuthABI relocations are currently defined in the vendor experiment space. Arm reserves codes 580 to 600 for static PAuthABI relocations and 1040 - 1060 for dynamic PAuthABI relocations.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've got no issues with the reserved ranges. But perhaps reword the paragraph slightly to indicate that the plan is to migrate the relocations currently defined in the vendor experiment stage to the reserved ranges. As it's phrased now it's not totally clear to me how the two sentences relate to each other.

@smithp35
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for the comments, I've abandoned this in favour of #100

@smithp35 smithp35 closed this May 20, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants