From: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
To: Thomas Neumann <thomas.neumann@in.tum.de>,
Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] handle unwind tables that are embedded within unwinding code, [PR111731]
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 09:25:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFiYyc03fX9hhOgxH7PwWW3N6AXnm5g6-ckoykrwEmPYg+Cziw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dcc20aec-ce49-4497-b329-4bab4a6a05dc@in.tum.de>
On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 11:31 AM Thomas Neumann
<thomas.neumann@in.tum.de> wrote:
>
> Original bug report: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111731
> Given that this is a regression, is this okay for gcc 13 and mainline?
It does look straightforward but I hope Jason or Florian can provide the ACK.
Thanks,
Richard.
> The unwinding mechanism registers both the code range and the unwind
> table itself within a b-tree lookup structure. That data structure
> assumes that is consists of non-overlappping intervals. This
> becomes a problem if the unwinding table is embedded within the
> code itself, as now the intervals do overlap.
>
> To fix this problem we now keep the unwind tables in a separate
> b-tree, which prevents the overlap.
>
> libgcc/ChangeLog:
> PR libgcc/111731
> * unwind-dw2-fde.c: Split unwind ranges if they contain the
> unwind table.
> ---
> libgcc/unwind-dw2-fde.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/libgcc/unwind-dw2-fde.c b/libgcc/unwind-dw2-fde.c
> index 61a578d097e..9d503545677 100644
> --- a/libgcc/unwind-dw2-fde.c
> +++ b/libgcc/unwind-dw2-fde.c
> @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ typedef __UINTPTR_TYPE__ uintptr_type;
> #include "unwind-dw2-btree.h"
>
> static struct btree registered_frames;
> +static struct btree registered_objects;
> static bool in_shutdown;
>
> static void
> @@ -58,6 +59,7 @@ release_registered_frames (void)
> /* Release the b-tree and all frames. Frame releases that happen later are
> * silently ignored */
> btree_destroy (®istered_frames);
> + btree_destroy (®istered_objects);
> in_shutdown = true;
> }
>
> @@ -103,6 +105,21 @@ static __gthread_mutex_t object_mutex;
> #endif
> #endif
>
> +#ifdef ATOMIC_FDE_FAST_PATH
> +// Register the pc range for a given object in the lookup structure.
> +static void
> +register_pc_range_for_object (uintptr_type begin, struct object *ob)
> +{
> + // Register the object itself to know the base pointer on deregistration.
> + btree_insert (®istered_objects, begin, 1, ob);
> +
> + // Register the frame in the b-tree
> + uintptr_type range[2];
> + get_pc_range (ob, range);
> + btree_insert (®istered_frames, range[0], range[1] - range[0], ob);
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> /* Called from crtbegin.o to register the unwind info for an object. */
>
> void
> @@ -124,13 +141,7 @@ __register_frame_info_bases (const void *begin, struct object *ob,
> #endif
>
> #ifdef ATOMIC_FDE_FAST_PATH
> - // Register the object itself to know the base pointer on deregistration.
> - btree_insert (®istered_frames, (uintptr_type) begin, 1, ob);
> -
> - // Register the frame in the b-tree
> - uintptr_type range[2];
> - get_pc_range (ob, range);
> - btree_insert (®istered_frames, range[0], range[1] - range[0], ob);
> + register_pc_range_for_object ((uintptr_type) begin, ob);
> #else
> init_object_mutex_once ();
> __gthread_mutex_lock (&object_mutex);
> @@ -178,13 +189,7 @@ __register_frame_info_table_bases (void *begin, struct object *ob,
> ob->s.b.encoding = DW_EH_PE_omit;
>
> #ifdef ATOMIC_FDE_FAST_PATH
> - // Register the object itself to know the base pointer on deregistration.
> - btree_insert (®istered_frames, (uintptr_type) begin, 1, ob);
> -
> - // Register the frame in the b-tree
> - uintptr_type range[2];
> - get_pc_range (ob, range);
> - btree_insert (®istered_frames, range[0], range[1] - range[0], ob);
> + register_pc_range_for_object ((uintptr_type) begin, ob);
> #else
> init_object_mutex_once ();
> __gthread_mutex_lock (&object_mutex);
> @@ -232,7 +237,7 @@ __deregister_frame_info_bases (const void *begin)
>
> #ifdef ATOMIC_FDE_FAST_PATH
> // Find the originally registered object to get the base pointer.
> - ob = btree_remove (®istered_frames, (uintptr_type) begin);
> + ob = btree_remove (®istered_objects, (uintptr_type) begin);
>
> // Remove the corresponding PC range.
> if (ob)
> @@ -240,7 +245,7 @@ __deregister_frame_info_bases (const void *begin)
> uintptr_type range[2];
> get_pc_range (ob, range);
> if (range[0] != range[1])
> - btree_remove (®istered_frames, range[0]);
> + btree_remove (®istered_frames, range[0]);
> }
>
> // Deallocate the sort array if any.
> --
> 2.43.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-20 8:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-16 10:19 [PATCH v4] eliminate mutex in fast path of __register_frame Thomas Neumann
2022-09-16 14:49 ` Jason Merrill
2022-09-18 8:59 ` Dimitar Dimitrov
2022-09-18 9:20 ` Thomas Neumann
2022-09-18 10:02 ` Thomas Neumann
2022-09-19 13:46 ` Stephan Bergmann
2022-09-19 13:55 ` Thomas Neumann
2022-09-19 14:00 ` Stephan Bergmann
2022-09-19 15:33 ` Thomas Neumann
2022-09-20 5:39 ` Stephan Bergmann
2022-11-21 11:14 ` Tamar Christina
2022-11-21 11:22 ` Thomas Neumann
2022-11-21 11:48 ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-11-21 17:13 ` H.J. Lu
2022-11-22 0:31 ` Thomas Neumann
2022-11-22 8:20 ` Florian Weimer
2022-11-22 9:12 ` Thomas Neumann
2022-12-09 17:34 ` [PATCH] initialize fde objects lazily Thomas Neumann
2022-12-15 16:11 ` Tamar Christina
2022-12-16 17:25 ` Jason Merrill
2023-05-02 14:32 ` [PATCH] release the sorted FDE array when deregistering a frame [PR109685] Thomas Neumann
2023-05-10 10:49 ` [PATCH] fix radix sort on 32bit platforms [PR109670] Thomas Neumann
2023-08-10 11:33 ` [PATCH] preserve base pointer for __deregister_frame [PR110956] Thomas Neumann
2023-08-11 15:21 ` Jeff Law
2024-03-15 10:29 ` [PATCH] handle unwind tables that are embedded within unwinding code, [PR111731] Thomas Neumann
2024-03-20 8:25 ` Richard Biener [this message]
2024-03-22 13:35 ` Jeff Law
2024-03-22 13:36 ` Jeff Law
2024-03-22 14:43 ` Thomas Neumann
2022-11-22 8:00 ` [PATCH] speed up end_fde_sort using radix sort Thomas Neumann
2022-12-16 18:02 ` Jason Merrill
2022-11-21 11:49 ` [PATCH v4] eliminate mutex in fast path of __register_frame Tamar Christina
2022-11-21 11:53 ` Thomas Neumann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAFiYyc03fX9hhOgxH7PwWW3N6AXnm5g6-ckoykrwEmPYg+Cziw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=jason@redhat.com \
--cc=thomas.neumann@in.tum.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).