From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Weimer Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at C startup and thread creation (v10) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 16:22:55 +0200 Message-ID: <87blz27uio.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> References: <20190503184219.19266-1-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> <875zprm4jo.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <732661684.21584.1559314109886.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <87muj2k4ov.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <1528929896.22217.1559326257155.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <87o93d4lqb.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <117220011.27079.1559663870037.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <87wohzorj0.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <1329439108.43041.1560348962006.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1329439108.43041.1560348962006.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (Mathieu Desnoyers's message of "Wed, 12 Jun 2019 10:16:02 -0400 (EDT)") Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mathieu Desnoyers Cc: carlos , Joseph Myers , Szabolcs Nagy , libc-alpha , Thomas Gleixner , Ben Maurer , Peter Zijlstra , "Paul E. McKenney" , Boqun Feng , Will Deacon , Dave Watson , Paul Turner , Rich Felker , linux-kernel , linux-api List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org * Mathieu Desnoyers: >> It's the registration from libc.so which needs some care. In >> particular, we must not override an existing registration. > > OK, so it could check if __rseq_abi.cpu_id is -1, and only > perform registration if it is the case. Or do you have another > approach in mind ? No, __rseq_abi will not be shared with the outer libc, so the inner libc will always see -1 there, even if the outer libc has performed registration. libio/vtables.c has some example what you can do: /* In case this libc copy is in a non-default namespace, we always need to accept foreign vtables because there is always a possibility that FILE * objects are passed across the linking boundary. */ { Dl_info di; struct link_map *l; if (!rtld_active () || (_dl_addr (_IO_vtable_check, &di, &l, NULL) != 0 && l->l_ns != LM_ID_BASE)) return; } _IO_vtable_check would have to be replaced with your own function; the actual function doesn't really matter. The rtld_active check covers the static dlopen case, where rtld_active () is false in the inner libc. Thanks, Florian