On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Kees Cook wrote: > Hugh Dickins said: > > Inconsistency detected by ld.so: rtld.c: 1217: dl_main: > > Assertion `_rtld_local._dl_rtld_map.l_libname' failed! > > I'm trying to reproduce the problem you saw (so that I can then test > your proposed fix). However, I haven't had any luck. I've got a > pie-compiled version of bash, and I've been running it in a loop for a > while now with the original randomization patch. (I can clearly see the > base address bouncing around.) > > I'm at just over 10 million exec's, and I haven't hit the problem. :( > > Do you have any clues on how to trigger this more reliably?
It was in doing kernel builds that I hit it, nothing special: an overnight cycle of kernel building would collapse in a few hours. openSUSE 10.2. If that doesn't reproduce it for you, let me know and I'll try again with the original patch, to reproduce it here: maybe something else has changed in 2.6.21-rc to affect it. > > Also, does anyone have any thoughts on why x86 uses a ELF_ET_DYN_BASE > below the libraries, where as x86_64 uses one above them? From this, > I'd expect x86_64 to collide with the libraries at times. I need more > help understanding the memory layouts, I guess. :) Andi would tell definitively, but I guess it's merely that with so much more address space to play with, x86_64 can divide up that space more satisfactorily. But don't be misled: try "ulimit -s unlimited" and I expect you'll find i386 allocating mmap addresses (hence libraries) from the opposite end, below ELF_ET_DYN_BASE. Hugh - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
