Hi Vineet, Vineet Gupta wrote, > _dl_zalloc callers don't check for allocaton failure. It kind of makes > sense since such early allocations are unlikely to fail, and even if > they do, ldso would segv anyways thus bringing the issue to attention. > > However there's a gcc nuance which led to this patch. > > It seems gcc at -O2 (for DODEBUG build), does additional coge gen > analysis for pointer dereference from erroneous paths and it "isolates" > such code paths with a intrinsic abort/trap etc. > > The ldso code fragment which was triggering this: > > | add_ldso(struct dyn_elf *rpnt) > | if (rpnt) > | ... > | else > | rpnt = _dl_zalloc() > | > | rpnt->dyn = tpnt <---- potential NULL pointer deref > > ARC gcc currently generates an abort() call which doesn't exist in ldso, > causing link errors (with a newer vrsion of binutils). > > ARM gcc 6.2.1 behaves similarly, altough instead of abort, it generates > a trap inducing UDF instruction > > | 367c: ebfffb79 bl 2468 <_dl_malloc> > | 3680: e51b2068 ldr r2, [fp, #-104] ; 0xffffff98 > | 3684: e3500000 cmp r0, #0 > | 3688: 0a000006 beq 36a8 <_dl_add_elf_hash_table+0x280> > | ... > | 36a8: e5862000 str r2, [r6] > | 36ac: e7f000f0 udf # > > So add an explict dl_exit() in dl_zalloc error case to beat the > compiler. > > Note that this error propagagtion analysis stops if the function in > consideration (_dl_zalloc) is NOT inlined. Hence the reason it only > shows up for DODEBUG builds which builds ldso at -O2 which is more > aggressive about inlining. > > If this patch is not considered worth applying then the workaround > suggested by Claudiu is to to build ldso with > -fno-isolate-erroneous-paths-dereference > > Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vgu...@synopsys.com>
Applied and pushed, Waldemar _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@uclibc-ng.org https://mailman.uclibc-ng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
