Re: port-alpha/57511: ld.elf_so(1) does not support secure PLT for alpha

["Jason Thorpe via gnats" <gnats-admin%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR port-alpha/57511; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Jason Thorpe <thorpej%me.com@localhost>
To: Taylor Campbell <riastradh%NetBSD.org@localhost>
Cc: Rin Okuyama <rokuyama.rk%gmail.com@localhost>,
 Jason Thorpe <thorpej%NetBSD.org@localhost>,
 "gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost" <gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost>,
 "netbsd-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost" <netbsd-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost>
Subject: Re: port-alpha/57511: ld.elf_so(1) does not support secure PLT for
 alpha
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2025 09:00:17 -0700

 > On Apr 17, 2025, at 12:29=E2=80=AFPM, Taylor R Campbell =
 <riastradh%NetBSD.org@localhost> wrote:
 >=20
 > The attached patch addresses PR 57511 and PR 57717 by implementing
 > support for secureplt in ld.elf_so on alpha and flipping it back on by
 > default (as upstream has it) in binutils.
 >=20
 > I also took the liberty of leaving some more explanatory comments
 > about what's going on in rtld_start.S, based on examination of PLT
 > headers actually generated by binutils.
 >=20
 > Missing: automatic tests of programs built with `-Wl,--secureplt',
 > `-Wl,--no-secureplt', and `-Wl,--no-secureplt,--traditional-format',
 > so we make sure all three paths remain exercised.
 >=20
 > Review welcome!  I hope my accent isn't showing through too much in
 > the assembly code as a non-native Alpha speaker.
 > <pr57511-alphasecureplt.patch>
 
 Looks good to me.  I do have concerns about the performance implications =
 of large programs that end up with multiple GOTs, but that=E2=80=99s an =
 issue with the format, not with the change itself.
 
 -- thorpej