[Bug sanitizer/64839] New: libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[Bug sanitizer/64839] New: libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[harald at gigawatt dot nl]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

            Bug ID: 64839
           Summary: libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>
           Product: gcc
           Version: 5.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: sanitizer
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: harald at gigawatt dot nl
                CC: dodji at gcc dot gnu.org, dvyukov at gcc dot gnu.org,
                    jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, kcc at gcc dot gnu.org

glibc stopped installing rpc headers by default back in 2011: versions 2.14 and
2.15 never install them, versions 2.16 and higher require the configuration
option --enable-obsolete-rpc. Most distros still install the headers for
backwards compatibility, but on systems that use default glibc, building
libsanitizer, and thus GCC, fails with

   
../../../../gcc/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cc:134:21:
fatal error: rpc/xdr.h: No such file or directory

Given that libsanitizer doesn't actually use anything from the header other
than as a sanity check, the build shouldn't fail if the header is missing.

GCC is configured with

  ../gcc/configure --build=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --host=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
--prefix=$HOME/gcc-run --enable-languages=c,c++

and re-checked today with sources from:

  commit 31aebeec4f215f444c96c0dbc333c4eff3f7809a
  Author: ienkovich <ienkovich@138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4>
  Date:   Wed Jan 28 11:46:44 2015 +0000

Version 4.9.2 builds just fine.

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[harald at gigawatt dot nl]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

--- Comment #1 from Harald van Dijk <harald at gigawatt dot nl> ---
FWIW, libsanitizer builds just fine if the rpc references are forcibly removed,
like so:

--- a/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cc
+++ b/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cc
@@ -131,7 +131,6 @@
 #include <netax25/ax25.h>
 #include <netipx/ipx.h>
 #include <netrom/netrom.h>
-#include <rpc/xdr.h>
 #include <scsi/scsi.h>
 #include <sys/mtio.h>
 #include <sys/kd.h>
@@ -1148,19 +1147,6 @@ CHECK_SIZE_AND_OFFSET(group, gr_gid);
 CHECK_SIZE_AND_OFFSET(group, gr_mem);

 #if SANITIZER_LINUX && !SANITIZER_ANDROID
-CHECK_TYPE_SIZE(XDR);
-CHECK_SIZE_AND_OFFSET(XDR, x_op);
-CHECK_SIZE_AND_OFFSET(XDR, x_ops);
-CHECK_SIZE_AND_OFFSET(XDR, x_public);
-CHECK_SIZE_AND_OFFSET(XDR, x_private);
-CHECK_SIZE_AND_OFFSET(XDR, x_base);
-CHECK_SIZE_AND_OFFSET(XDR, x_handy);
-COMPILER_CHECK(__sanitizer_XDR_ENCODE == XDR_ENCODE);
-COMPILER_CHECK(__sanitizer_XDR_DECODE == XDR_DECODE);
-COMPILER_CHECK(__sanitizer_XDR_FREE == XDR_FREE);
-#endif
-
-#if SANITIZER_LINUX && !SANITIZER_ANDROID
 COMPILER_CHECK(sizeof(__sanitizer_FILE) <= sizeof(FILE));
 CHECK_SIZE_AND_OFFSET(FILE, _flags);
 CHECK_SIZE_AND_OFFSET(FILE, _IO_read_ptr);

But that's clearly not acceptable :)

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2015-02-10
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed.

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[y.gribov at samsung dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

Yury Gribov <y.gribov at samsung dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |y.gribov at samsung dot com

--- Comment #3 from Yury Gribov <y.gribov at samsung dot com> ---
I've sent fix upstream: http://reviews.llvm.org/D8698 . We'll probably need
similar checks for existance of xdr.h in GCC Autoconf.

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[y.gribov at samsung dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

--- Comment #4 from Yury Gribov <y.gribov at samsung dot com> ---
Finally fixed upstream in
https://github.com/llvm-mirror/compiler-rt/commit/d09b23010698144d10cba0dacc5c599f230cbf62
. Does anyone have time to backport to GCC 5?

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[y.gribov at samsung dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

--- Comment #5 from Yury Gribov <y.gribov at samsung dot com> ---
Created attachment 35286
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35286&action=edit
Proposed patch

Would something like this make sense? If yes, I'll do full round of testing and
send to gcc-patches so that we hopefully get it in GCC5.

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
if test "$ac_cv_header_rpc_xdr_h" = "yes"; then
etc. should be written as
if test x"$ac_cv_header_rpc_xdr_h" = xyes; then
Otherwise, LGTM (patch preapproved), but if you want to get it into GCC 5,
commit it RSN (within a few hours).

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[ygribov at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

--- Comment #7 from ygribov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ygribov
Date: Mon Apr 13 08:59:55 2015
New Revision: 222043

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222043&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-04-13  Yury Gribov  <y.gribov@samsung.com>

    PR sanitizer/64839

    libsanitizer/
    * sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform.h: Cherry pick
    upstream r234470.
    * sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cc: Ditto.
    * configure.ac (RPC_DEFS): Check for precense of RPC headers.
    * sanitizer_common/Makefile.am (DEFS): Pass info to compiler.
    * Makefile.in: Regenerate.
    * asan/Makefile.in: Regenerate.
    * config.h.in: Regenerate.
    * configure: Regenerate.
    * interception/Makefile.in: Regenerate.
    * libbacktrace/Makefile.in: Regenerate.
    * lsan/Makefile.in: Regenerate.
    * sanitizer_common/Makefile.in: Regenerate.
    * tsan/Makefile.in: Regenerate.
    * ubsan/Makefile.in: Regenerate.

Modified:
    trunk/libsanitizer/ChangeLog
    trunk/libsanitizer/Makefile.in
    trunk/libsanitizer/asan/Makefile.in
    trunk/libsanitizer/config.h.in
    trunk/libsanitizer/configure
    trunk/libsanitizer/configure.ac
    trunk/libsanitizer/interception/Makefile.in
    trunk/libsanitizer/libbacktrace/Makefile.in
    trunk/libsanitizer/lsan/Makefile.in
    trunk/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/Makefile.am
    trunk/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/Makefile.in
    trunk/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform.h
    trunk/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cc
    trunk/libsanitizer/tsan/Makefile.in
    trunk/libsanitizer/ubsan/Makefile.in

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Please consider backporting it to gcc-5-branch, but at this point only after
5.1 is released.

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[thierry.reding at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

Thierry Reding <thierry.reding at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |thierry.reding at gmail dot com

--- Comment #9 from Thierry Reding <thierry.reding at gmail dot com> ---
Is there something I can do to help move this along? I've tried to locally
backport Yury's changeset to the gcc-5-branch and the only conflict I get is in
ChangeLog and that's easy to fix up. I don't have commit access, though, so I
can't commit the result.

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[y.gribov at samsung dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

--- Comment #10 from Yury Gribov <y.gribov at samsung dot com> ---
Did libsanitizer build for you both with and without xdr.h? If yes, I'll just
go ahead and submit this.

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[harald at gigawatt dot nl]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

--- Comment #11 from Harald van Dijk <harald at gigawatt dot nl> ---
(In reply to Yury Gribov from comment #10)
> Did libsanitizer build for you both with and without xdr.h? If yes, I'll
> just go ahead and submit this.

I'm using your patch applied to 5.1.0 without issues on my system without
xdr.h. If you need someone to confirm that it doesn't break systems that do
have it, and don't get feedback from someone else soon enough, I can probably
check that in the weekend.

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[y.gribov at samsung dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

--- Comment #12 from Yury Gribov <y.gribov at samsung dot com> ---
> I'm using your patch applied to 5.1.0 without issues on my system without xdr.h.

That's probably ok, thanks. I'll submit on Monday then (to be online if
problems arise).

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[ygribov at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

--- Comment #13 from ygribov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ygribov
Date: Tue May 12 07:02:09 2015
New Revision: 223032

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223032&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-05-12  Yury Gribov  <y.gribov@samsung.com>

        Backport from mainline
        2015-04-13  Yury Gribov  <y.gribov@samsung.com>

        PR sanitizer/64839
        * sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform.h: Cherry pick
        upstream r234470.
        * sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cc: Ditto.
        * configure.ac (RPC_DEFS): Check for precense of RPC headers.
        * sanitizer_common/Makefile.am (DEFS): Pass info to compiler.
        * Makefile.in: Regenerate.
        * asan/Makefile.in: Regenerate.
        * config.h.in: Regenerate.
        * configure: Regenerate.
        * interception/Makefile.in: Regenerate.
        * libbacktrace/Makefile.in: Regenerate.
        * lsan/Makefile.in: Regenerate.
        * sanitizer_common/Makefile.in: Regenerate.
        * tsan/Makefile.in: Regenerate.
        * ubsan/Makefile.in: Regenerate.

Modified:
    branches/gcc-5-branch/libsanitizer/ChangeLog
    branches/gcc-5-branch/libsanitizer/Makefile.in
    branches/gcc-5-branch/libsanitizer/asan/Makefile.in
    branches/gcc-5-branch/libsanitizer/config.h.in
    branches/gcc-5-branch/libsanitizer/configure
    branches/gcc-5-branch/libsanitizer/configure.ac
    branches/gcc-5-branch/libsanitizer/interception/Makefile.in
    branches/gcc-5-branch/libsanitizer/libbacktrace/Makefile.in
    branches/gcc-5-branch/libsanitizer/lsan/Makefile.in
    branches/gcc-5-branch/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/Makefile.am
    branches/gcc-5-branch/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/Makefile.in
    branches/gcc-5-branch/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform.h
   
branches/gcc-5-branch/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cc
    branches/gcc-5-branch/libsanitizer/tsan/Makefile.in
    branches/gcc-5-branch/libsanitizer/ubsan/Makefile.in

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[thierry.reding at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

--- Comment #14 from Thierry Reding <thierry.reding at gmail dot com> ---
Thanks Yury.

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[y.gribov at samsung dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

--- Comment #15 from Yury Gribov <y.gribov at samsung dot com> ---
(In reply to Thierry Reding from comment #14)
> Thanks Yury.

Np, you are welcome.

@Harald: could you close the bug if it works for you?

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[geoff at geoff dot codes]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

Geoff Nixon <geoff at geoff dot codes> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |geoff at geoff dot codes

--- Comment #16 from Geoff Nixon <geoff at geoff dot codes> ---
Sorry to be an idiot, but I just ran into this building from the 5.1 release
tarball. Is the patch attached to this bug (dated 2015-04-10) what I should use
to patch against the release? Or is there a different set of changes specific
to the 5.1 branch backport?

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[y.gribov at samsung dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

--- Comment #17 from Yury Gribov <y.gribov at samsung dot com> ---
(In reply to Geoff Nixon from comment #16)
> what I should use to patch against the release?
> Or is there a different set of changes
> specific to the 5.1 branch backport?

For 5.1 you'd better use the patch in gcc-5-branch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=223032

[Bug sanitizer/64839] libsanitizer shouldn't require <rpc/xdr.h>

[geoff at geoff dot codes]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64839

--- Comment #18 from Geoff Nixon <geoff at geoff dot codes> ---
Ok thanks, for other idiots like myself who can't seem to figure out how to get
viewvc to generate a diff for a specific rev, a -p1 patch is:

svn diff -c 223032 svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-5-branch

Or if you don't have subversion installed, here:
http://gist.github.com/anonymous/7f239960c46240d83a67/raw