* PING^2: [PATCH 0/2] nptl: Update struct pthread_unwind_buf
@ 2018-02-21 15:33 H.J. Lu
2018-02-24 5:48 ` Carlos O'Donell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2018-02-21 15:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Florian Weimer; +Cc: Carlos O'Donell, GNU C Library
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 12:02 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 7:24 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 6:33 AM, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> On 02/09/2018 03:13 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I built glibc master with gcc-8.0.1 -mcet -fcf-protection. Some object
>>>> files do get CET marker as expected. But static executable isn't:
>>>
>>>
>>> I said static libraries. If I compile this code (based on the example from
>>> the manual page) on Fedora rawhide:
>>>
>>
>> Glibc never provides binary compatibility with static libraries. My suggestions
>> are
>>
>> 1. Recompile static libraries after CET is enabled in glibc. Or
>> 2. Don't compile static libraries with CET.
>>
>> BTW, we don't have space to save shadow stack register with existing
>> cancel buf.
>>
>
> PING:
>
> https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-02/msg00290.html
> https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-02/msg00291.html
>
PING.
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: PING^2: [PATCH 0/2] nptl: Update struct pthread_unwind_buf
2018-02-21 15:33 PING^2: [PATCH 0/2] nptl: Update struct pthread_unwind_buf H.J. Lu
@ 2018-02-24 5:48 ` Carlos O'Donell
2018-02-24 15:20 ` H.J. Lu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Carlos O'Donell @ 2018-02-24 5:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H.J. Lu, Florian Weimer; +Cc: GNU C Library
On 02/21/2018 07:33 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 12:02 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 7:24 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 6:33 AM, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> On 02/09/2018 03:13 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I built glibc master with gcc-8.0.1 -mcet -fcf-protection. Some object
>>>>> files do get CET marker as expected. But static executable isn't:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I said static libraries. If I compile this code (based on the example from
>>>> the manual page) on Fedora rawhide:
>>>>
>>>
>>> Glibc never provides binary compatibility with static libraries. My suggestions
>>> are
>>>
>>> 1. Recompile static libraries after CET is enabled in glibc. Or
>>> 2. Don't compile static libraries with CET.
>>>
>>> BTW, we don't have space to save shadow stack register with existing
>>> cancel buf.
>>>
>>
>> PING:
>>
>> https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-02/msg00290.html
>> https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-02/msg00291.html
>>
>
> PING.
These patches are pending the conclusion of the discussion that the
shadow stack pointer does not need to be restored in the unwinding
use case, and need only be placed in such a location that if it is
written it writes within the size of the existing truncated unwind
buffer.
Please see:
https://www.sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-02/msg00679.html
--
Cheers,
Carlos.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: PING^2: [PATCH 0/2] nptl: Update struct pthread_unwind_buf
2018-02-24 5:48 ` Carlos O'Donell
@ 2018-02-24 15:20 ` H.J. Lu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2018-02-24 15:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Carlos O'Donell; +Cc: Florian Weimer, GNU C Library
On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 9:48 PM, Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 02/21/2018 07:33 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 12:02 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 7:24 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 6:33 AM, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 02/09/2018 03:13 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I built glibc master with gcc-8.0.1 -mcet -fcf-protection. Some object
>>>>>> files do get CET marker as expected. But static executable isn't:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I said static libraries. If I compile this code (based on the example from
>>>>> the manual page) on Fedora rawhide:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Glibc never provides binary compatibility with static libraries. My suggestions
>>>> are
>>>>
>>>> 1. Recompile static libraries after CET is enabled in glibc. Or
>>>> 2. Don't compile static libraries with CET.
>>>>
>>>> BTW, we don't have space to save shadow stack register with existing
>>>> cancel buf.
>>>>
>>>
>>> PING:
>>>
>>> https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-02/msg00290.html
>>> https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-02/msg00291.html
>>>
>>
>> PING.
>
> These patches are pending the conclusion of the discussion that the
> shadow stack pointer does not need to be restored in the unwinding
> use case, and need only be placed in such a location that if it is
> written it writes within the size of the existing truncated unwind
> buffer.
>
> Please see:
> https://www.sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-02/msg00679.html
Please see:
https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-02/msg00696.html
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-02-24 15:18 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2018-02-21 15:33 PING^2: [PATCH 0/2] nptl: Update struct pthread_unwind_buf H.J. Lu
2018-02-24 5:48 ` Carlos O'Donell
2018-02-24 15:20 ` H.J. Lu
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).