SIGBUS failure for misc/tst-bz21269 on i386
Commit Message
On 03/27/2018 11:47 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Here is the coredump that I can get:
>
> Thread 1 "tst-bz21269" received signal SIGBUS, Bus error.
> 0x565564a0 in do_test () at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386/tst-bz21269.c:217
> 217 while (atomic_load (&ftx) != 0)
> (gdb) bt
> #0 0x565564a0 in do_test () at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386/tst-bz21269.c:217
> #1 0x56556bc2 in support_test_main (argc=<optimized out>, argv=0xffffd518, config=0xffffd424) at support_test_main.c:321
> #2 0x56556061 in main (argc=2, argv=0xffffd514) at ../support/test-driver.c:164
> (gdb) print &ftx
> $1 = (atomic_uint *) 0x5655a0e0 <ftx>
> (gdb) print ftx
> $2 = 0
Ahh. I see.
/* Fire up thread modify_ldt call. */
atomic_store (&ftx, 2);
while (atomic_load (&ftx) != 0)
;
/* On success, modify_ldt will segfault us synchronously and we
will escape via siglongjmp. */
support_record_failure ();
But:
xsethandler (SIGSEGV, sigsegv_handler, 0);
/* 32-bit kernels send SIGILL instead of SIGSEGV on IRET faults. */
xsethandler (SIGILL, sigsegv_handler, 0);
So some kernels apparently use SIGBUS instead, and the crash actually
shows the test succeeded.
Would you please try the attached patch?
Thanks,
Florian
Comments
On 2018-03-28 10:01, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 03/27/2018 11:47 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > Here is the coredump that I can get:
> >
> > Thread 1 "tst-bz21269" received signal SIGBUS, Bus error.
> > 0x565564a0 in do_test () at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386/tst-bz21269.c:217
> > 217 while (atomic_load (&ftx) != 0)
> > (gdb) bt
> > #0 0x565564a0 in do_test () at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386/tst-bz21269.c:217
> > #1 0x56556bc2 in support_test_main (argc=<optimized out>, argv=0xffffd518, config=0xffffd424) at support_test_main.c:321
> > #2 0x56556061 in main (argc=2, argv=0xffffd514) at ../support/test-driver.c:164
> > (gdb) print &ftx
> > $1 = (atomic_uint *) 0x5655a0e0 <ftx>
> > (gdb) print ftx
> > $2 = 0
>
> Ahh. I see.
>
> /* Fire up thread modify_ldt call. */
> atomic_store (&ftx, 2);
>
> while (atomic_load (&ftx) != 0)
> ;
>
> /* On success, modify_ldt will segfault us synchronously and we will
> escape via siglongjmp. */
> support_record_failure ();
>
> But:
>
> xsethandler (SIGSEGV, sigsegv_handler, 0);
> /* 32-bit kernels send SIGILL instead of SIGSEGV on IRET faults. */
> xsethandler (SIGILL, sigsegv_handler, 0);
>
> So some kernels apparently use SIGBUS instead, and the crash actually shows
> the test succeeded.
>
> Would you please try the attached patch?
I confirm that this patch works. It returns no error with the fixed
libc, and a segmentation one with the previous one without the bz21269
fix.
Aurelien
On 03/28/2018 07:36 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> I confirm that this patch works. It returns no error with the fixed
> libc, and a segmentation one with the previous one without the bz21269
> fix.
I reviewed the bug again, and I don't think it will interfere with the
test objective, so I'm going to commit this soon unless someone objects.
Thanks,
Florian
Subject: [PATCH] Linux i386: tst-bz21269 triggers SIGBUS on some kernels
To: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
In addition to SIGSEGV and SIGILL, SIGBUS is also a possible signal
generated by the kernel.
2018-03-28 Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
* sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386/tst-bz21269.c (do_test): Also
capture SIGBUS.
@@ -177,6 +177,8 @@ do_test (void)
xsethandler (SIGSEGV, sigsegv_handler, 0);
/* 32-bit kernels send SIGILL instead of SIGSEGV on IRET faults. */
xsethandler (SIGILL, sigsegv_handler, 0);
+ /* Some kernels send SIGBUS instead. */
+ xsethandler (SIGBUS, sigsegv_handler, 0);
thread = xpthread_create (0, threadproc, 0);