On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 10:53, Heinrich Schuchardt heinrich.schuchardt@canonical.com wrote:
On 15.01.25 09:06, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
Hi Heinrich
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 at 12:30, Heinrich Schuchardt heinrich.schuchardt@canonical.com wrote:
Use the same include as arm64 for the linker script.
Adjust the 32-bit ARM PE-COFF header accordingly and harmonize it with the 64-bit ARM header.
Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt heinrich.schuchardt@canonical.com
arch/arm/lib/crt0_arm_efi.S | 37 ++++++++++--------- arch/arm/lib/elf_arm_efi.lds | 71 +----------------------------------- 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 88 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/lib/crt0_arm_efi.S b/arch/arm/lib/crt0_arm_efi.S index b5dfd4e3819..590fcf515da 100644 --- a/arch/arm/lib/crt0_arm_efi.S +++ b/arch/arm/lib/crt0_arm_efi.S @@ -14,11 +14,11 @@ /* * Magic "MZ" signature for PE/COFF */
.globl image_base-image_base:
.globl ImageBase+ImageBase: .short IMAGE_DOS_SIGNATURE /* 'MZ' */ .skip 58 /* 'MZ' + pad + offset == 64 */
.long pe_header - image_base /* Offset to the PE header */
.long pe_header - ImageBase /* Offset to the PE header */@@ -38,16 +38,16 @@ optional_header: .short IMAGE_NT_OPTIONAL_HDR32_MAGIC /* PE32 format */ .byte 0x02 /* MajorLinkerVersion */ .byte 0x14 /* MinorLinkerVersion */
.long _edata - _start /* SizeOfCode */
.long _etext - _start /* SizeOfCode */Was that an error all along? Or the boundaries changed by using the include file?
According to https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/debug/pe-format
SizeOfCode: "The size of the code (text) section, or the sum of all code sections if there are multiple sections."
We only have one code section.
Looking at EDK2's Shell.efi SizeOfCode equals the VirtualSize of the .text section. It does not include the .data section.
Hmm that's interesting. gnu-efi includes .data AFAICT. Looking at the pe/coff spec there's SizeOfCode and SizeOfInitializedData (for .data) and SizeOfUninitializedData (for .bss). But in both gnu-efi and U-Boot we define those two as 0 though. So I think we should either keep SizeOfData as is, or define it as you propose and also define SizeOfInitializedData and SizeOfUninitializedData correctly -- and I don't know if the latter will have any implication on loaders.
Cheers /Ilias
Best regards
Heinrich
.long 0 /* SizeOfInitializedData */ .long 0 /* SizeOfUninitializedData */
.long _start - image_base /* AddressOfEntryPoint */.long _start - image_base /* BaseOfCode */
.long _start - ImageBase /* AddressOfEntryPoint */.long _start - ImageBase /* BaseOfCode */ .long 0 /* BaseOfData */[...]
Other than that it looks ok
Thanks for cleaning this up! /Ilias