From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oa1-x32.google.com (mail-oa1-x32.google.com [IPv6:2001:4860:4864:20::32]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E81B0385841E for ; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 12:32:10 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org E81B0385841E Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linaro.org Received: by mail-oa1-x32.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-13bef14ea06so5367512fac.3 for ; Fri, 04 Nov 2022 05:32:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:organization:from:references :cc:to:content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date :message-id:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=OGIflBYzmKsyF8fV6IPTV/rlVK+qTcjDI1H1cIRTmSk=; b=C/sMcYJJH7iyR4Cud6NpeyaIdrN0+jq58te3tmYHiS5G9IYe0YfquKAFBrISioDJ7Q SkmknqgLqrmB7RAibNRrrM5AformJUwM0Ec9UDBhSjtgK84YYslP3Gi7Albb1NvydMVC 1chM1X5SDPLwL2oLJfnCAoJK5Gz3k5VVA0eTdFlhoMTvlbqMmgvhLTCK/eOyGiX+J+m+ Illzyw0zUD1QKR4YoUCiBvvZz251lE3HUuRcMIx9aqLEewRgx0dgZLGltP6O5UUtp0Z9 YhHLj+WrU69Cu/kyeC7SjmrrbgJQPM4jX2eLuOCN42uzd7UN01RCPpaRr6wP42/sFCrP u78w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:organization:from:references :cc:to:content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date :message-id:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=OGIflBYzmKsyF8fV6IPTV/rlVK+qTcjDI1H1cIRTmSk=; b=SBtHwKLQ4JN+4toUr+32KnSYTu4x1AGD2fTUajPSaCzUAUz9k9qidP0b6ywo/tsLMt pYOKgGRKA1X71cC3bBs+F3+TvprVILCl00P3GpK8HSy5I7lAti5kHXTb6Puh5unSd8u4 tp4gsIsMl37QyWoJ/PQHxL2KzYhrz4SYvGb3QFnI2XxZbV7Q3FKO9bk2yt/aU493fAnv 8uMBJmqgZintuS+jdvR5YXnoxogJ1F5MUw2S6s2OAS+H4s6TX/wuNhzURjYRxF2YSIG9 YG9O1mChRH5R0G2zZyp5YT/34hUFuYkwmJAaKg4/uhfkik5JpYS21JfFUYz6eikvYFob c3Qg== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf0POyWRlkj8UurfsQDghRPEhJyJGhMYaMOcjHTOzKk/k4AI9PKp VmJsIlKKIDOdmJmT0n1lxykjtiXOLKv5W6aH X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM4Hv0WzFCuARjzDwTTnS0zaGpumTs8PihY17faxQeaBuO2s9uxjMwwZdqUXCZOcS6CwTtLykQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6871:68d:b0:13d:9a60:ea05 with SMTP id l13-20020a056871068d00b0013d9a60ea05mr4541397oao.287.1667565129949; Fri, 04 Nov 2022 05:32:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2804:1b3:a7c0:a9f4:4405:8c19:a65e:e640? ([2804:1b3:a7c0:a9f4:4405:8c19:a65e:e640]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z21-20020a056870d69500b0013320d9d9casm1648109oap.44.2022.11.04.05.32.08 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 04 Nov 2022 05:32:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2022 09:32:06 -0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/9] aarch64: Add the clone3 wrapper Content-Language: en-US To: "H.J. Lu" Cc: Szabolcs Nagy , libc-alpha@sourceware.org, Christian Brauner References: <20220930192613.3491147-1-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <20220930192613.3491147-5-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <1d4ce210-2b28-b061-9780-f643eaa80a27@linaro.org> <8a3dc5d9-b731-4c45-7252-8157ba0be6c2@linaro.org> <1a5cc9ec-de78-cb4d-3bd3-7f37dc666f73@linaro.org> From: Adhemerval Zanella Netto Organization: Linaro In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP 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: On 03/11/22 18:58, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 2:22 PM Adhemerval Zanella Netto > wrote: >> >> >> >> On 03/11/22 13:55, Adhemerval Zanella Netto wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 03/11/22 13:52, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: >>>> The 11/03/2022 13:39, Adhemerval Zanella Netto wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 03/11/22 13:31, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: >>>>>> The 11/03/2022 13:22, Adhemerval Zanella Netto wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 03/11/22 11:01, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: >>>>>>>> The 11/03/2022 10:15, Adhemerval Zanella Netto wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 02/11/22 09:12, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: >>>>>>>>>> The 09/30/2022 16:26, Adhemerval Zanella via Libc-alpha wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> It follow the internal signature: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> extern int clone3 (struct clone_args *__cl_args, size_t __size, >>>>>>>>>>> int (*__func) (void *__arg), void *__arg); >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> And x86_64 semantics to return EINVAL if either cl_args or func >>>>>>>>>>> is NULL. The stack is 16-byte aligned prior executing func. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "x86_64 semantics" sounds wrong: maybe this should be documented? >>>>>>>>>> i'd expect 0 cl_args/func to be UB like in most posix apis. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Right, I think it is worth to document the function semantic >>>>>>>>> properly at least on its internal header (include/clone_internal.h). >>>>>>>>> H.J also added a new clone3.h headers, which is not currently installed >>>>>>>>> that I am inclined to just remove it from now. We might reinstate >>>>>>>>> if/when we decide to provide the clone3 as an ABI. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> And returning EINVAL for 0 cl_args/func aligns with our exported clone >>>>>>>>> interface, where EINVAL is also returned for 0 function argument. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ok. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> and aligning sp in the child fails if signals are allowed there >>>>>>>>>> (pthreads does not allow signals now, direct callers might). >>>>>>>>>> i dont know if that's a concert (or if unaligned stack is >>>>>>>>>> something we should fix up in clone3). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It was overlooked on initial x86_64 clone3 implementation as well. I >>>>>>>>> think it better to just return EINVAL for unaligned stacks and avoid >>>>>>>>> to change the stack pointer in the created thread. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> long time ago linux did that on aarch64, but it was removed: >>>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=e6d9a52543338603e25e71e0e4942f05dae0dd8a >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> i think in clone3 the kernel should have aligned (it knows >>>>>>>> the bounds now), doing it in the userspace wrapper is weird >>>>>>>> (should we adjust the stack size?). and not doing it at all >>>>>>>> makes clone3 hard to use portably (user has to know target >>>>>>>> specific pcs requirements). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> not sure what's the best way forward. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think the stack size won't matter much here, at least not from >>>>>>> kernel point of view (the resulting stack size will most likely >>>>>>> be page aligned anyway). But I think this kernel commit makes a good >>>>>>> point that silently adjusting the stack in userland is not the >>>>>>> correct approach, I think H.J has done to make it consistent with >>>>>>> glibc clone implementation which does it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> IMHO the best approach would to just remove the stack alignment, >>>>>>> since it incurs the signal handling issue. >>>>>> >>>>>> current generic clone callers dont align the stack and >>>>>> e.g. unaligned pthread custom stack should work. >>>>>> >>>>>> so we have to do arch specific stack alignment somewhere, >>>>>> maybe in pthread_create? >>>>> >>>>> I am thinking on __clone_internal, where if an unaligned stack is >>>>> used it creates a new clone_args struct with adjust arguments. It >>>>> can adjust the struct in place (not sure which is better). >>>> >>>> if the api is not exposed, then i think the arg can be modified >>>> in place. (if clone3 api is exposed to users then we should not >>>> modify user structs unless the clone3 api contract explicitly >>>> allows this.) >>>> >>>> either aligning in pthread_create or __clone_internal works for me, >>>> the target specific clone3 syscall should not in case that gets >>>> exposed to users. >>>> >>> >>> The arg modification would be done only internally by __clone_internal, >>> if we ever export __clone3 it will not mess with stack alignment (my >>> idea is to remove it from x86_64 as well). >> >> All the internal usage of __clone_internal are done with all signal masked, >> so aligning the stack is currently safe. However, I still think moving out >> the stack alignment of __clone3 is still a net gain: it remove an >> implementation detail (block/unblock signals) and simplifies the arch-specific >> code. >> >> However it makes a possible libc wrap clunky, the caller will need to know >> the ABI stack alignment prior to the call since kernel does not automatically >> align the stack. > > For the internal clone3, we can drop stack alignment adjustment. The > internal users are responsible for correct stack alignment. If there is > a public clone3 wrapper, it should adjust stack alignment. > Ok, I will a documentation that __clone3 does not align the stack.