On 15/01/24 09:46, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > The 01/13/2024 13:49, Florian Weimer wrote: >> This commit >> >> commit 8abddb187b33480d8827f44ec655f45734a1749d >> Author: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burg...@embecosm.com> >> Date: Sat Aug 5 14:31:06 2023 +0200 >> >> libgcc: support heap-based trampolines >> >> Add support for heap-based trampolines on x86_64-linux, aarch64-linux, >> and x86_64-darwin. Implement the __builtin_nested_func_ptr_created and >> __builtin_nested_func_ptr_deleted functions for these targets. >> >> Co-Authored-By: Maxim Blinov <maxim.bli...@embecosm.com> >> Co-Authored-By: Iain Sandoe <i...@sandoe.co.uk> >> Co-Authored-By: Francois-Xavier Coudert <fxcoud...@gcc.gnu.org> >> >> added TLS usage to libgcc_s.so.1. The way that libgcc_s is currently >> built, it ends up using a dynamic TLS variant on the Linux targets. >> This means that there is no up-front TLS allocation with glibc (but >> there would be one with musl). >> >> There is still a compatibility impact because glibc assigns a TLS module >> ID upfront. This seems to be what causes the >> ust/libc-wrapper/test_libc-wrapper test in lttng-tools to fail. We end >> up with an infinite regress during process termination because >> libgcc_s.so.1 has been loaded, resulting in a DTV update. When this >> happens, the bottom of the stack looks like this: >> >> #4447 0x00007ffff7f288f0 in free () from >> /lib64/liblttng-ust-libc-wrapper.so.1 >> #4448 0x00007ffff7fdb142 in free (ptr=<optimized out>) >> at ../include/rtld-malloc.h:50 >> #4449 _dl_update_slotinfo (req_modid=3, new_gen=2) at ../elf/dl-tls.c:822 >> #4450 0x00007ffff7fdb214 in update_get_addr (ti=0x7ffff7f2bfc0, >> gen=<optimized out>) at ../elf/dl-tls.c:916 >> #4451 0x00007ffff7fddccc in __tls_get_addr () >> at ../sysdeps/x86_64/tls_get_addr.S:55 >> #4452 0x00007ffff7f288f0 in free () from >> /lib64/liblttng-ust-libc-wrapper.so.1 >> #4453 0x00007ffff7fdb142 in free (ptr=<optimized out>) >> at ../include/rtld-malloc.h:50 >> #4454 _dl_update_slotinfo (req_modid=2, new_gen=2) at ../elf/dl-tls.c:822 >> #4455 0x00007ffff7fdb214 in update_get_addr (ti=0x7ffff7f39fa0, >> gen=<optimized out>) at ../elf/dl-tls.c:916 >> #4456 0x00007ffff7fddccc in __tls_get_addr () >> at ../sysdeps/x86_64/tls_get_addr.S:55 >> #4457 0x00007ffff7f36113 in lttng_ust_cancelstate_disable_push () >> from /lib64/liblttng-ust-common.so.1 >> #4458 0x00007ffff7f4c2e8 in ust_lock_nocheck () from /lib64/liblttng-ust.so.1 >> #4459 0x00007ffff7f5175a in lttng_ust_cleanup () from >> /lib64/liblttng-ust.so.1 >> #4460 0x00007ffff7fca0f2 in _dl_call_fini ( >> closure_map=closure_map@entry=0x7ffff7fbe000) at dl-call_fini.c:43 >> #4461 0x00007ffff7fce06e in _dl_fini () at dl-fini.c:114 >> #4462 0x00007ffff7d82fe6 in __run_exit_handlers () from /lib64/libc.so.6 >> >> Cc:ing <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org> for awareness. >> >> The issue also requires a recent glibc with changes to DTV management: >> commit d2123d68275acc0f061e73d5f86ca504e0d5a344 ("elf: Fix slow tls >> access after dlopen [BZ #19924]"). If I understand things correctly, >> before this glibc change, we didn't deallocate the old DTV, so there was >> no call to the free function. > > with 19924 fixed, after a dlopen or dlclose every thread updates > its dtv on the next dynamic tls access. > > before that, dtv was only updated up to the generation of the > module being accessed for a particular tls access. > > so hitting the free in the dtv update path is now more likely > but the free is not new, it was there before. > > also note that this is unlikely to happen on aarch64 since > tlsdesc only does dynamic tls access after a 512byte static > tls reservation runs out. > >> >> On the glibc side, we should recommend that intercepting mallocs and its >> dependencies use initial-exec TLS because that kind of TLS does not use >> malloc. If intercepting mallocs using dynamic TLS work at all, that's >> totally by accident, and was in the past helped by glibc bug 19924. (I > > right. > >> don't think there is anything special about libgcc_s.so.1 that triggers >> the test failure above, it is just an object with dynamic TLS that is >> implicitly loaded via dlopen at the right stage of the test.) In this >> particular case, we can also paper over the test failure in glibc by not >> call free at all because the argument is a null pointer: >> >> diff --git a/elf/dl-tls.c b/elf/dl-tls.c >> index 7b3dd9ab60..14c71cbd06 100644 >> --- a/elf/dl-tls.c >> +++ b/elf/dl-tls.c >> @@ -819,7 +819,8 @@ _dl_update_slotinfo (unsigned long int req_modid, size_t >> new_gen) >> dtv entry free it. Note: this is not AS-safe. */ >> /* XXX Ideally we will at some point create a memory >> pool. */ >> - free (dtv[modid].pointer.to_free); >> + if (dtv[modid].pointer.to_free != NULL) >> + free (dtv[modid].pointer.to_free); >> dtv[modid].pointer.val = TLS_DTV_UNALLOCATED; >> dtv[modid].pointer.to_free = NULL; > > can be done, but !=NULL is more likely since we do modid reuse > after dlclose. > > there is also a realloc in dtv resizing which happens when more > than 16 modules with tls are loaded after thread creation > (DTV_SURPLUS). > > i'm not sure if it's worth supporting malloc interposers that > only work sometimes. > Maybe one option would to try reinstate the async-signal-safe TLS code to avoid malloc/free in dynamic TLS altogether. We revert it on 2.14 release cause it broke ASAN/LSAN [1], but I think we might try to reinstate on 2.40 and work with sanitizer project to get this sort out. [1] https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2014-January/047931.html _______________________________________________ lttng-dev mailing list lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
Re: [lttng-dev] New TLS usage in libgcc_s.so.1, compatibility impact
Adhemerval Zanella Netto via lttng-dev Mon, 15 Jan 2024 05:55:26 -0800
- [lttng-dev] New TLS usage in libgcc... Florian Weimer via lttng-dev
- Re: [lttng-dev] New TLS usage ... Szabolcs Nagy via lttng-dev
- Re: [lttng-dev] New TLS us... Adhemerval Zanella Netto via lttng-dev
- Re: [lttng-dev] New TL... Carlos O'Donell via lttng-dev
- Re: [lttng-dev] Ne... Florian Weimer via lttng-dev
- Re: [lttng-de... Iain Sandoe via lttng-dev
- Re: [lttn... Florian Weimer via lttng-dev
- Re: [lttng-de... Joseph Myers via lttng-dev
- Re: [lttng-dev] New TLS usage ... Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
- Re: [lttng-dev] New TLS us... Florian Weimer via lttng-dev
- Re: [lttng-dev] New TL... Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev