RFC: Implementation of ELF sharable sections

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RFC: Implementation of ELF sharable sections

H.J. Lu-27
Here is one implementation of ELF sharable section proposal:

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/generic-abi/browse_thread/thread/bca08f6560f61b0d

Several people have expressed interests. I post it here for comments.
I used OS specific values. If we get consensus, I can change those
values to generic range.


H.J.

binutils-shr-78.patch (39K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: Implementation of ELF sharable sections

Christoph Hellwig
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 03:31:46PM -0800, H. J. Lu wrote:
> Here is one implementation of ELF sharable section proposal:
>
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/generic-abi/browse_thread/thread/bca08f6560f61b0d
>
> Several people have expressed interests. I post it here for comments.
> I used OS specific values. If we get consensus, I can change those
> values to generic range.

For Linux pleases don't put this into the ABI until the OS actually
supports this type of memory.  Which I doubt it will anytime soon as
the concept is rather oddly defined and no one posted a kernel-level
design and implementation yet.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: Implementation of ELF sharable sections

H.J. Lu-27
On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 08:53:07AM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 03:31:46PM -0800, H. J. Lu wrote:
> > Here is one implementation of ELF sharable section proposal:
> >
> > http://groups-beta.google.com/group/generic-abi/browse_thread/thread/bca08f6560f61b0d
> >
> > Several people have expressed interests. I post it here for comments.
> > I used OS specific values. If we get consensus, I can change those
> > values to generic range.
>
> For Linux pleases don't put this into the ABI until the OS actually
> supports this type of memory.  Which I doubt it will anytime soon as
> the concept is rather oddly defined and no one posted a kernel-level
> design and implementation yet.

Kernel support may be useful, but not strictly required.  Consider
shared libraries with sharable segment, they are loaded by dynamic
linker, not kernel.

Another thing, a sharabale segment isn't a PT_LOAD segment. Dynamic
linker doesn't have to know it for applications to run correctly. So
it is backward compatible.

H.J.