[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error and pthread_cancel

2023-03-19 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dimitri at ouroboros dot rocks --- Comm

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error and pthread_cancel

2022-10-18 Thread stsp at users dot sourceforge.net via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 --- Comment #18 from Stas Sergeev --- (In reply to Stas Sergeev from comment #5) > And its running on a stack previously > poisoned before pthread_cancel(). And the reason for that is because the glibc in use is the one not built with -fsanitiz

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error and pthread_cancel

2022-02-11 Thread stsp at users dot sourceforge.net via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 --- Comment #17 from Stas Sergeev --- I sent the small patch-set here: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220126191441.3380389-1-st...@yandex.ru/ but it is so far ignored by kernel developers. Someone from this bugzilla should give me an Ack or Revi

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error and pthread_cancel

2022-01-25 Thread stsp at users dot sourceforge.net via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 --- Comment #16 from Stas Sergeev --- I think I'll propose to apply something like this to linux kernel: diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c index 6f3476dc7873..0549212a8dd6 100644 --- a/kernel/signal.c +++ b/kernel/signal.c @@ -4153

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error and pthread_cancel

2022-01-25 Thread stsp at users dot sourceforge.net via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 --- Comment #15 from Stas Sergeev --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #14) > Please report to upstream as well. I'd like some guidance on how should that be addressed, because that will allow to specify the upstream. I am not entirely su

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error and pthread_cancel

2022-01-25 Thread marxin at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 --- Comment #14 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Stas Sergeev from comment #13) > Found another problem. > https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/libsanitizer/asan/asan_posix. > cpp#L53 > The comment above that line talks about > SS_AUT

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error and pthread_cancel

2022-01-25 Thread stsp at users dot sourceforge.net via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 --- Comment #13 from Stas Sergeev --- Found another problem. https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/libsanitizer/asan/asan_posix.cpp#L53 The comment above that line talks about SS_AUTODISARM, but the line itself does not account for any f

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error

2022-01-21 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||contino at epigenesys dot com --- Comme

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error

2022-01-20 Thread stsp at users dot sourceforge.net via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 --- Comment #11 from Stas Sergeev --- The third bug here seems to be that __asan_handle_no_return: https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/libsanitizer/asan/asan_rtl.cpp#L602 also calls sigaltstack() before unpoisoning stacks. I believe th

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error

2022-01-19 Thread marxin at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 --- Comment #10 from Martin Liška --- (In reply to Stas Sergeev from comment #9) > (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #8) > > Please report the problem to upstream libsanitizer project: > > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues > > I

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error

2022-01-19 Thread stsp at users dot sourceforge.net via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 --- Comment #9 from Stas Sergeev --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #8) > Please report the problem to upstream libsanitizer project: > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues I already did: https://github.com/google/sanitizers/issu

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error

2022-01-19 Thread marxin at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW --- Comment #8 from Martin Liška --

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error

2022-01-18 Thread stsp at users dot sourceforge.net via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 --- Comment #7 from Stas Sergeev --- Created attachment 52221 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52221&action=edit test case This is a reproducer for both problems. $ cc -Wall -o bug -ggdb3 -fsanitize=address bug.c -O1 to see

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error

2022-01-18 Thread stsp at users dot sourceforge.net via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 --- Comment #6 from Stas Sergeev --- I think the fix (of at least 1 problem here) would be to move this line: https://code.woboq.org/gcc/libsanitizer/asan/asan_thread.cc.html#109 upwards, before this: https://code.woboq.org/gcc/libsanitizer/asan

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error

2022-01-18 Thread stsp at users dot sourceforge.net via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 --- Comment #5 from Stas Sergeev --- Another problem here seems to be that pthread_cancel() doesn't unpoison the cancelled thread's stack. This causes dtors to run on a randomly poisoned stack, depending on where the cancellation happened. That

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error

2022-01-18 Thread stsp at users dot sourceforge.net via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 --- Comment #4 from Stas Sergeev --- Thread 3 "X ev" hit Breakpoint 4, __sanitizer::UnsetAlternateSignalStack () at ../../../../libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_posix_libcdep.cpp:190 190 void UnsetAlternateSignalStack() { (gdb) n 194

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error

2022-01-18 Thread stsp at users dot sourceforge.net via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 --- Comment #3 from Stas Sergeev --- Why does it check for a redzone on a non-leaf function? GetAltStackSize() calls to a glibc's getconf and that overwrites a canary. Maybe it shouldn't use/check the redzone on a non-leaf function?

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error

2022-01-18 Thread stsp at users dot sourceforge.net via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 Stas Sergeev changed: What|Removed |Added CC||stsp at users dot sourceforge.net --- C

[Bug sanitizer/101476] AddressSanitizer check failed, points out a (potentially) non-existing stack error

2021-07-22 Thread marxin at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101476 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Ever confirmed|0