From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4AF573858C98 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 16:44:52 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 4AF573858C98 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 4AF573858C98 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1705337094; cv=none; b=FekfHUjipNxAORiviG6hJbiThAKftvtrWnOjPZYDCIgrx2uUMdSq4nzxelI/edCLNLfr/ifSqxgv80owKHyX4Qmn7rBWEyo7sQLqG87I/jimmxrEgSghXQ2+Hfrra9UpluwOCcPA9wazjtI9GYsVdetGMK2uaZqZxUSfUCUYGrk= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1705337094; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pKu4ft7oTR/mvr4OeV7AO/eFJxk9ALOhLy5J3re/xKg=; h=DKIM-Signature:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=YFEPgVw9SCmPOjPYXy9d6T9NWbc5WRATRhMEJhJUbEVP80Z0KLHgu/rrDNYECG6PBYZ6qdhN9vXw/zKdDmtDmLkfALsW421ZZctzk9a8moTRjdqQDArax3C/+O2W3kaU32DP19TrexP8BbqCB8Q845MK+qwjAKQED3YUPqwqBAA= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1705337091; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Jlx1/IU0nFOCyRGbbmcr2KmECl/j6tgbDiOcOvZr4SY=; b=OOdZSQODcC6g7e7DozYn7dfT8HD1zrZ6ujLpKxV0UWXfy/NxyDFiWwX1WoSkRm/A/ZW5E2 HkWm5LH6jZIOcsLv9HjNTTIR6NDqxjpiLCWDzbpsyQrUJkaTMgs+aki9S40dJ2PD9YZd+1 CO7KfXH4AFFdyfKIXwxeUGMYwqduNqE= 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) From: Florian Weimer 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 Subject: Re: New TLS usage in libgcc_s.so.1, compatibility impact 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 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,KAM_SHORT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: * 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