qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [Bug 1317090] Re: qemu fails on ELF files with no secti


From: Riku Voipio
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Bug 1317090] Re: qemu fails on ELF files with no section headers
Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 11:14:02 +0300
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

Hi Craig,

On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 03:53:38PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 7 May 2014 15:48, Peter Maydell <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On 7 May 2014 15:34, Paul Jimenez <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> Bug description:
> >>   Using the latest version of qemu-user-static from trusty, 2.0.0+dfsg-
> >>   2ubuntu1.
> >>
> >>   Reported to qemu and patch submitted long ago by the guy who wrote 
> >> http://www.devttys0.com/2011/12/qemu-vs-sstrip/
> >>   but apparently dropped on the floor - at least, I can't find it in any 
> >> qemu bug tracker anywhere.  It's now keeping me from running openwrt 
> >> binaries under qemu-arm-static (because the openwrt guys strip section 
> >> headers to save space on their teeny embedded boxes).  It's a one-line 
> >> patch, reproduced here:
> >>
> >>   --- qemu/linux-user/elfload.c   2011-12-02 15:16:07.637541215 -0500
> >>   +++ qemu-patched/linux-user/elfload.c   2011-12-02 15:27:24.061522798 
> >> -0500
> >>   @@ -1068,7 +1068,6 @@ static bool elf_check_ehdr(struct elfhdr
> >>        return (elf_check_arch(ehdr->e_machine)
> >>                && ehdr->e_ehsize == sizeof(struct elfhdr)
> >>                && ehdr->e_phentsize == sizeof(struct elf_phdr)
> >>   -            && ehdr->e_shentsize == sizeof(struct elf_shdr)
> >>                && (ehdr->e_type == ET_EXEC || ehdr->e_type == ET_DYN));
> >>    }
> >
> > Yeah; the equivalent kernel code:
> > http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v3.14.3/fs/binfmt_elf.c#L595
> > doesn't check the section header size, and nor should QEMU.
> 
> Original 2011 patch:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-trivial/2011-12/msg00025.html
 
> (hitting the 'reply' button gets us back the original email
> address to fix up the signed-off-by line with, so we can
> credit the fix to Craig properly.)

Can you resend the patch with your Signed-Off-By: ?

Riku



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]