elf: Disable some subtests of ifuncmain1, ifuncmain5 for !PIE
Checks
Context |
Check |
Description |
dj/TryBot-apply_patch |
success
|
Patch applied to master at the time it was sent
|
dj/TryBot-32bit |
success
|
Build for i686
|
Commit Message
Tested on i686-linux-gnu, x86_64-linux-gnu (with glibc defaults on a
toolchain which is not PIE-by-default). Built with build-many-glibcs.py
defaults (so GCC 12 and binutils 2.39). The x86 failures are gone.
---
elf/ifuncmain1.c | 13 +++++++++++++
elf/ifuncmain5.c | 9 +++++++++
2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
base-commit: 2ff48a4025515e93d722947a9eabb114f4a65b22
Comments
On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 11:26 AM Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Tested on i686-linux-gnu, x86_64-linux-gnu (with glibc defaults on a
> toolchain which is not PIE-by-default). Built with build-many-glibcs.py
> defaults (so GCC 12 and binutils 2.39). The x86 failures are gone.
>
> ---
> elf/ifuncmain1.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> elf/ifuncmain5.c | 9 +++++++++
> 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/elf/ifuncmain1.c b/elf/ifuncmain1.c
> index 747fc02648..6effce3d77 100644
> --- a/elf/ifuncmain1.c
> +++ b/elf/ifuncmain1.c
> @@ -19,7 +19,14 @@ typedef int (*foo_p) (void);
> #endif
>
> foo_p foo_ptr = foo;
> +
> +/* Address-significant access to protected symbols is not supported in
> + position-dependent mode on several architectures because GCC
> + generates relocations that assume that the address is local to the
> + main program. */
> +#ifdef __PIE__
> foo_p foo_procted_ptr = foo_protected;
> +#endif
>
> extern foo_p get_foo_p (void);
> extern foo_p get_foo_hidden_p (void);
> @@ -37,12 +44,16 @@ main (void)
> if ((*foo_ptr) () != -1)
> abort ();
>
> +#ifdef __PIE__
> if (foo_procted_ptr != foo_protected)
> abort ();
> +#endif
> if (foo_protected () != 0)
> abort ();
> +#ifdef __PIE__
> if ((*foo_procted_ptr) () != 0)
> abort ();
> +#endif
>
> p = get_foo_p ();
> if (p != foo)
> @@ -55,8 +66,10 @@ main (void)
> abort ();
>
> p = get_foo_protected_p ();
> +#ifdef __PIE__
> if (p != foo_protected)
> abort ();
> +#endif
> if (ret_foo_protected != 0 || (*p) () != ret_foo_protected)
> abort ();
>
> diff --git a/elf/ifuncmain5.c b/elf/ifuncmain5.c
> index f398085cb4..6fda768fb6 100644
> --- a/elf/ifuncmain5.c
> +++ b/elf/ifuncmain5.c
> @@ -14,12 +14,19 @@ get_foo (void)
> return foo;
> }
>
> +
> +/* Address-significant access to protected symbols is not supported in
> + position-dependent mode on several architectures because GCC
> + generates relocations that assume that the address is local to the
> + main program. */
> +#ifdef __PIE__
> foo_p
> __attribute__ ((noinline))
> get_foo_protected (void)
> {
> return foo_protected;
> }
> +#endif
>
> int
> main (void)
> @@ -30,9 +37,11 @@ main (void)
> if ((*p) () != -1)
> abort ();
>
> +#ifdef __PIE__
> p = get_foo_protected ();
> if ((*p) () != 0)
> abort ();
> +#endif
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> base-commit: 2ff48a4025515e93d722947a9eabb114f4a65b22
>
LGTM.
Thanks.
On 2022-11-04, H.J. Lu wrote:
>On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 11:26 AM Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Tested on i686-linux-gnu, x86_64-linux-gnu (with glibc defaults on a
>> toolchain which is not PIE-by-default). Built with build-many-glibcs.py
>> defaults (so GCC 12 and binutils 2.39). The x86 failures are gone.
>>
>> ---
>> elf/ifuncmain1.c | 13 +++++++++++++
>> elf/ifuncmain5.c | 9 +++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/elf/ifuncmain1.c b/elf/ifuncmain1.c
>> index 747fc02648..6effce3d77 100644
>> --- a/elf/ifuncmain1.c
>> +++ b/elf/ifuncmain1.c
>> @@ -19,7 +19,14 @@ typedef int (*foo_p) (void);
>> #endif
>>
>> foo_p foo_ptr = foo;
>> +
>> +/* Address-significant access to protected symbols is not supported in
>> + position-dependent mode on several architectures because GCC
>> + generates relocations that assume that the address is local to the
>> + main program. */
Address-significant access to protected symbols in the same module is
fine. To a protected symbol defined in another module is not.
The comment may need to clarify this.
Reviewed-by: Fangrui Song <maskray@google.com>
>> +#ifdef __PIE__
>> foo_p foo_procted_ptr = foo_protected;
>> +#endif
>>
>> extern foo_p get_foo_p (void);
>> extern foo_p get_foo_hidden_p (void);
>> @@ -37,12 +44,16 @@ main (void)
>> if ((*foo_ptr) () != -1)
>> abort ();
>>
>> +#ifdef __PIE__
>> if (foo_procted_ptr != foo_protected)
>> abort ();
>> +#endif
>> if (foo_protected () != 0)
>> abort ();
>> +#ifdef __PIE__
>> if ((*foo_procted_ptr) () != 0)
>> abort ();
>> +#endif
>>
>> p = get_foo_p ();
>> if (p != foo)
>> @@ -55,8 +66,10 @@ main (void)
>> abort ();
>>
>> p = get_foo_protected_p ();
>> +#ifdef __PIE__
>> if (p != foo_protected)
>> abort ();
>> +#endif
>> if (ret_foo_protected != 0 || (*p) () != ret_foo_protected)
>> abort ();
>>
>> diff --git a/elf/ifuncmain5.c b/elf/ifuncmain5.c
>> index f398085cb4..6fda768fb6 100644
>> --- a/elf/ifuncmain5.c
>> +++ b/elf/ifuncmain5.c
>> @@ -14,12 +14,19 @@ get_foo (void)
>> return foo;
>> }
>>
>> +
>> +/* Address-significant access to protected symbols is not supported in
>> + position-dependent mode on several architectures because GCC
>> + generates relocations that assume that the address is local to the
>> + main program. */
>> +#ifdef __PIE__
>> foo_p
>> __attribute__ ((noinline))
>> get_foo_protected (void)
>> {
>> return foo_protected;
>> }
>> +#endif
>>
>> int
>> main (void)
>> @@ -30,9 +37,11 @@ main (void)
>> if ((*p) () != -1)
>> abort ();
>>
>> +#ifdef __PIE__
>> p = get_foo_protected ();
>> if ((*p) () != 0)
>> abort ();
>> +#endif
>>
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> base-commit: 2ff48a4025515e93d722947a9eabb114f4a65b22
>>
>
>LGTM.
>
>Thanks.
>
>--
>H.J.
@@ -19,7 +19,14 @@ typedef int (*foo_p) (void);
#endif
foo_p foo_ptr = foo;
+
+/* Address-significant access to protected symbols is not supported in
+ position-dependent mode on several architectures because GCC
+ generates relocations that assume that the address is local to the
+ main program. */
+#ifdef __PIE__
foo_p foo_procted_ptr = foo_protected;
+#endif
extern foo_p get_foo_p (void);
extern foo_p get_foo_hidden_p (void);
@@ -37,12 +44,16 @@ main (void)
if ((*foo_ptr) () != -1)
abort ();
+#ifdef __PIE__
if (foo_procted_ptr != foo_protected)
abort ();
+#endif
if (foo_protected () != 0)
abort ();
+#ifdef __PIE__
if ((*foo_procted_ptr) () != 0)
abort ();
+#endif
p = get_foo_p ();
if (p != foo)
@@ -55,8 +66,10 @@ main (void)
abort ();
p = get_foo_protected_p ();
+#ifdef __PIE__
if (p != foo_protected)
abort ();
+#endif
if (ret_foo_protected != 0 || (*p) () != ret_foo_protected)
abort ();
@@ -14,12 +14,19 @@ get_foo (void)
return foo;
}
+
+/* Address-significant access to protected symbols is not supported in
+ position-dependent mode on several architectures because GCC
+ generates relocations that assume that the address is local to the
+ main program. */
+#ifdef __PIE__
foo_p
__attribute__ ((noinline))
get_foo_protected (void)
{
return foo_protected;
}
+#endif
int
main (void)
@@ -30,9 +37,11 @@ main (void)
if ((*p) () != -1)
abort ();
+#ifdef __PIE__
p = get_foo_protected ();
if ((*p) () != 0)
abort ();
+#endif
return 0;
}