gdb/dwarf: disable per-BFD resource sharing for -readnow objfiles
New in v2:
- Disable sharing only for -readnow objfiles, not all objfiles.
As described in PR 27541, we hit an internal error when loading a binary
the standard way and then loading it with the -readnow option:
$ ./gdb -nx -q --data-directory=data-directory ~/a.out -ex "set confirm
off" -ex "file -readnow ~/a.out"
Reading symbols from /home/simark/a.out...
Reading symbols from ~/a.out...
/home/simark/src/binutils-gdb/gdb/dwarf2/read.c:8098: internal-error:
void create_all_comp_units(dwarf2_per_objfile*): Assertion
`per_objfile->per_bfd->all_comp_units.empty ()' failed.
This is a recurring problem that exposes a design issue in the DWARF
per-BFD sharing feature. Things work well when loading a binary with
the same method (with/without index, with/without readnow) twice in a
row. But they don't work so well when loading a binary with different
methods. See this previous fix, for example:
efb763a5ea35 ("gdb: check for partial symtab presence in
dwarf2_initialize_objfile")
That one handled the case where the first load is normal (uses partial
symbols) and the second load uses an index.
The problem is that when loading an objfile with a method A, we create a
dwarf2_per_bfd and some dwarf2_per_cu_data and initialize them with the
data belonging to that method. When loading another obfile sharing the
same BFD but with a different method B, it's not clear how to re-use the
dwarf2_per_bfd/dwarf2_per_cu_data previously created, because they
contain the data specific to method A. https://komiya-dental.com/
I think the most sensible fix would be to not share a dwarf2_per_bfd
between two objfiles loaded with different methods. That means that two
objfiles sharing the same BFD and loaded the same way would share a
dwarf2_per_bfd. Two objfiles sharing the same BFD but loaded with
different methods would use two different dwarf2_per_bfd structures.
http://www.iu-bloomington.com/
However, this isn't a trivial change. So to fix the known issue quickly
(including in the gdb 10 branch), this patch just disables all
dwarf2_per_bfd sharing for objfiles using READNOW.
Generalize the gdb.base/index-cache-load-twice.exp test to test all
the possible combinations of loading a file with partial symtabs, index
and readnow. Move it to gdb.dwarf2, since it really exercises features
of the DWARF
gdb/dwarf: disable per-BFD resource sharing for -readnow objfiles
https://www.webb-dev.co.uk/
New in v2:
- Disable sharing only for -readnow objfiles, not all objfiles.
As described in PR 27541, we hit an internal error when loading a binary
the standard way and then loading it with the -readnow option:
https://waytowhatsnext.com/
$ ./gdb -nx -q --data-directory=data-directory ~/a.out -ex "set confirm
off" -ex "file -readnow ~/a.out"
Reading symbols from /home/simark/a.out...
Reading symbols from ~/a.out...
/home/simark/src/binutils-gdb/gdb/dwarf2/read.c:8098: internal-error:
void create_all_comp_units(dwarf2_per_objfile*): Assertion
`per_objfile->per_bfd->all_comp_units.empty ()' failed.
http://www.acpirateradio.co.uk/
This is a recurring problem that exposes a design issue in the DWARF
per-BFD sharing feature. Things work well when loading a binary with
the same method (with/without index, with/without readnow) twice in a
row. But they don't work so well when loading a binary with different
methods. See this previous fix, for example: http://www.logoarts.co.uk/
efb763a5ea35 ("gdb: check for partial symtab presence in
dwarf2_initialize_objfile")
That one handled the case where the first load is normal (uses partial
symbols) and the second load uses an index. http://www.slipstone.co.uk/
The problem is that when loading an objfile with a method A, we create a
dwarf2_per_bfd and some dwarf2_per_cu_data and initialize them with the
data belonging to that method. When loading another obfile sharing the
same BFD but with a different method B, it's not clear how to re-use the
dwarf2_per_bfd/dwarf2_per_cu_data previously created, because they
contain the data specific to method A. http://embermanchester.uk/
I think the most sensible fix would be to not share a dwarf2_per_bfd
between two objfiles loaded with different methods. http://connstr.net/
That means that two
objfiles sharing the same BFD and loaded the same way would share a
dwarf2_per_bfd. Two objfiles http://joerg.li/ sharing the same BFD but
loaded with
different methods would use two different dwarf2_per_bfd structures.
http://www.jopspeech.com/
However, this isn't a trivial change. So to fix the known issue quickly
(including in the gdb 10 branch), this patch just disables all
http://www.wearelondonmade.com/
dwarf2_per_bfd sharing for objfiles using READNOW.
Generalize the gdb.base/index-cache-load-twice.exp test to test all
http://www.compilatori.com/
the possible combinations of loading a file with partial symtabs, index
and readnow. Move it to gdb.dwarf2, since it really exercises features
of the DWARF http://www-look-4.com/
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to eglibc in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/413278
Title:
stack protector guard value does not lead with a NULL byte
Status in GLibC:
Fix Released
Status in eglibc package in Ubuntu:
Fix Released
Status in glibc package in Ubuntu:
Invalid
Status in eglibc source package in Jaunty:
Invalid
Status in glibc source package in Jaunty:
Fix Released
Status in eglibc source package in Karmic:
Fix Released
Status in glibc source package in Karmic:
Invalid
Bug description:
IMPACT: stack protections are weakened due to strcpy function being able to
write the stack guard (since it does not start with a zero byte).
ADDRESSED: correctly implement leading zero, as done in Karmic.
DISCUSSION: regression potential is low, since the patch is isolated and well
tested.
TEST CASE:
$ bzr branch lp:~ubuntu-bugcontrol/qa-regression-testing/master
qa-regression-testing
$ cd qa-regression-testing/scripts
$ ./test-glibc-security.py -v
Build helper tools ... (9.10) ok
glibc heap protection ... ok
sprintf not pre-truncated with -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 ... ok
glibc pointer obfuscation ... ok
Password hashes ... (sha512) ok
Stack guard exists ... ok
Stack guard leads with zero byte ... FAIL
Stack guard is randomized ... ok
======================================================================
FAIL: Stack guard leads with zero byte
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "./test-glibc-security.py", line 170, in test_81_stack_guard_leads_zero
self.assertEqual(one.startswith('00 '), expected, one)
AssertionError: 62 55 59 69 cd 20 39 80
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 8 tests in 0.145s
FAILED (failures=1)
expected outcome: 0 failures.
ProblemType: Bug
Architecture: amd64
Date: Thu Aug 13 13:59:02 2009
Dependencies:
findutils 4.4.2-1
gcc-4.4-base 4.4.1-1ubuntu3
libc6 2.10.1-0ubuntu6
libgcc1 1:4.4.1-1ubuntu3
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 9.10
Package: libc6 2.10.1-0ubuntu6
ProcEnviron:
LANGUAGE=en_US.UTF-8
PATH=(custom, user)
LANG=en_US.UTF-8
SHELL=/bin/bash
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.31-5.24-generic
SourcePackage: eglibc
Uname: Linux 2.6.31-5-generic x86_64
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/glibc/+bug/413278/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
