[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 ---

[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

[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

[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 @@

[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

[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 >

[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