From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.lttng.org (lists.lttng.org [167.114.26.123]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BD19C47258 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 16:46:11 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=lists.lttng.org; s=default; t=1705337170; bh=U/Pi2BOM5+QXLI6iDIjZH1dh/tWebbfX6T0YOdnLYKY=; h=To:Cc:References:Date:In-Reply-To:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=uQloATwE90/7hQXNSYoGOaslAHfsGkvr3bbCnZAIWjL0oXMBF3tvUBS0en2r0diJX x0iTzWJ8HcVDY0fe9+fLgN+uis1Bb2XSAquzW99GEz2pWWbUz6nKpV0Z1gunJZyQnK fI8pjosxX7nIwi6yxZwzXDLZAqyYfho8J3OIE81eiwDgKVkXbhaa/kF/FxKv0elzfC aATR3r1utzbFJ8atdvcWuRLiSgLLjf9TrHrePrNx5sJYJ2Y8KcfDZAaH739QwH7SFM VceBkp9R2IoECR9yP4mPBC8eJvIlfpyzm3J/CYNMAfBn6LWUq6LAIFJJU8/tCKkHrF Hauss5zs3kk0A== Received: from lists-lttng01.efficios.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.lttng.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4TDJ1Y6pJqz1PY9; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 11:46:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by lists.lttng.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4TDJ1W5wLdz1PTK for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 11:46:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx-ext.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-157-iqpS22TgOUSYKoZd98J9GQ-1; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 11:44:48 -0500 X-MC-Unique: iqpS22TgOUSYKoZd98J9GQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.9]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F9AC3C0C117; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 16:44:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (unknown [10.39.192.140]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C7CFE492BC6; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 16:44:46 +0000 (UTC) To: Iain Sandoe Cc: Carlos O'Donell , Adhemerval Zanella Netto , Szabolcs Nagy , GCC Development , libc-alpha@sourceware.org, aburgess@redhat.com, lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org References: <8734v1ieke.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <81279c5d-0b60-0e37-abe9-0936688b14fa@redhat.com> <87jzoa6249.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <4F19001F-1F46-49EC-8A69-11F7CF5017B2@sandoe.co.uk> Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2024 17:44:45 +0100 In-Reply-To: <4F19001F-1F46-49EC-8A69-11F7CF5017B2@sandoe.co.uk> (Iain Sandoe's message of "Mon, 15 Jan 2024 15:38:06 +0000") Message-ID: <87bk9m5ywy.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.9 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Subject: Re: [lttng-dev] New TLS usage in libgcc_s.so.1, compatibility impact X-BeenThere: lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: LTTng development list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Florian Weimer via lttng-dev Reply-To: Florian Weimer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: lttng-dev-bounces@lists.lttng.org Sender: "lttng-dev" * Iain Sandoe: >> On 15 Jan 2024, at 15:35, Florian Weimer wrote: >> >> * Carlos O'Donell: >> >>> I agree. TLS should be seen more like .bss/.data rather than something >>> that is allocated with malloc(). >> >> There wasn't consensus regarding this in 2014. See below. >> >>> If we leak memory via TLS that is a glibc bug that we can deal with, >> >> This is something that libgcc_s.so.1 does in GCC 14 if the heap >> trampolines are used. > > Is there a GCC BZ for this? > (if there is something we should address in GCC, it would be better sooner) Sorry, I wanted to write a reproducer first. With it, I found two more issue. Memory (resource) leak in -ftrampoline-impl=heap Incorrect symbol versions for __builtin_nested_func_ptr_created, __builtin_nested_func_ptr in libgcc_s.so.1 __builtin_nested_func_ptr_created, __builtin_nested_func_ptr should be dynamically linked by default Thanks, Florian _______________________________________________ lttng-dev mailing list lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev