target/uefi: clarify documentation #58420
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This clarifies why FP-units are disabled on UEFI targets, as well as why we must opt into the NXCOMPAT feature. I did find some time to investigate why GRUB and friends disable FP on UEFI. The specification explicitly allows using MMX/SSE/AVX, but as it turns out it does not mandate enabling the instruction sets explicitly. Hence, any use of these instructions will trigger CPU exceptions, unless an application explicitly enables them (which is not an option, as these are global flags that better be controlled by the kernel/firmware). Furthermore, UEFI systems are allowed to mark any non-code page as non-executable. Hence, we must make sure to never place code on the stack or heap. So we better pass /NXCOMPAT to the linker for it to complain if it ever places code in non-code pages. Lastly, this fixes some typos in related comments.
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
@bors r+ rollup |
|
📌 Commit 15e4bd3 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
Centril
added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 13, 2019
target/uefi: clarify documentation This clarifies why FP-units are disabled on UEFI targets, as well as why we must opt into the NXCOMPAT feature. I did find some time to investigate why GRUB and friends disable FP on UEFI. The specification explicitly allows using MMX/SSE/AVX, but as it turns out it does not mandate enabling the instruction sets explicitly. Hence, any use of these instructions will trigger CPU exceptions, unless an application explicitly enables them (which is not an option, as these are global flags that better be controlled by the kernel/firmware). Furthermore, UEFI systems are allowed to mark any non-code page as non-executable. Hence, we must make sure to never place code on the stack or heap. So we better pass /NXCOMPAT to the linker for it to complain if it ever places code in non-code pages. Lastly, this fixes some typos in related comments. r? @alexcrichton
Centril
added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 13, 2019
target/uefi: clarify documentation This clarifies why FP-units are disabled on UEFI targets, as well as why we must opt into the NXCOMPAT feature. I did find some time to investigate why GRUB and friends disable FP on UEFI. The specification explicitly allows using MMX/SSE/AVX, but as it turns out it does not mandate enabling the instruction sets explicitly. Hence, any use of these instructions will trigger CPU exceptions, unless an application explicitly enables them (which is not an option, as these are global flags that better be controlled by the kernel/firmware). Furthermore, UEFI systems are allowed to mark any non-code page as non-executable. Hence, we must make sure to never place code on the stack or heap. So we better pass /NXCOMPAT to the linker for it to complain if it ever places code in non-code pages. Lastly, this fixes some typos in related comments. r? @alexcrichton
Centril
added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 13, 2019
target/uefi: clarify documentation This clarifies why FP-units are disabled on UEFI targets, as well as why we must opt into the NXCOMPAT feature. I did find some time to investigate why GRUB and friends disable FP on UEFI. The specification explicitly allows using MMX/SSE/AVX, but as it turns out it does not mandate enabling the instruction sets explicitly. Hence, any use of these instructions will trigger CPU exceptions, unless an application explicitly enables them (which is not an option, as these are global flags that better be controlled by the kernel/firmware). Furthermore, UEFI systems are allowed to mark any non-code page as non-executable. Hence, we must make sure to never place code on the stack or heap. So we better pass /NXCOMPAT to the linker for it to complain if it ever places code in non-code pages. Lastly, this fixes some typos in related comments. r? @alexcrichton
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 13, 2019
Rollup of 10 pull requests Successful merges: - #58110 (libpanic_unwind => 2018) - #58167 (HirId-ify hir::BodyId) - #58202 (Ignore future deprecations in #[deprecated]) - #58272 (Cut down on number formating code size) - #58276 (Improve the error messages for missing stability attributes) - #58354 (Fix ICE and invalid filenames in MIR printing code) - #58381 (Only suggest imports if not imported.) - #58386 (Fix #54242) - #58400 (Fix rustc_driver swallowing errors when compilation is stopped) - #58420 (target/uefi: clarify documentation) Failed merges: r? @ghost
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This clarifies why FP-units are disabled on UEFI targets, as well as
why we must opt into the NXCOMPAT feature.
I did find some time to investigate why GRUB and friends disable FP on
UEFI. The specification explicitly allows using MMX/SSE/AVX, but as it
turns out it does not mandate enabling the instruction sets explicitly.
Hence, any use of these instructions will trigger CPU exceptions,
unless an application explicitly enables them (which is not an option,
as these are global flags that better be controlled by the
kernel/firmware).
Furthermore, UEFI systems are allowed to mark any non-code page as
non-executable. Hence, we must make sure to never place code on the
stack or heap. So we better pass /NXCOMPAT to the linker for it to
complain if it ever places code in non-code pages.
Lastly, this fixes some typos in related comments.
r? @alexcrichton