On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 02:04:17PM -0800, Song Liu wrote: > Hi Josh, > > On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 11:34 AM Josh Poimboeuf <jpoim...@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 09:51:41AM -0800, Song Liu wrote: > > > > Ignorant arm64 question: is the module's text further away from slab > > > > memory than vmlinux text, thus requiring a different instruction (or > > > > GOT/TOC) to access memory further away in the address space? > > > > > > It appears to me the module text is very close to vmlinux text: > > > > > > vmlinux: ffff8000800b4b68 T copy_process > > > module: ffff80007b0f06d0 t copy_process > > > [livepatch_always_inline_special_static] > > > > Hm... the only other thing I can think of is that the klp relas might be > > wrong somewhere. If you share patched.o and .ko files from the same > > build I could take a look. > > A tarball with these files is available here: > > https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ONB1tC9oK-Z5ShmSXneqWLTjJgC5Xq-C/view?usp=drive_link
Thanks, I'll take a look. > > That kallsyms issue has caused other headaches. It really needs to be > > fixed to use the actual ELF symbol size. > > Maybe we should have a "module_text_end" symbol? Maybe, though it would be a lot cleaner for kallsyms to just use the actual ELF sizes. And actually I'm thinking that would be a pretty trivial change. -- Josh
