From: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>
To: libc-help@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: Problem with atexit and _dl_fini
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 15:14:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a9533e7d-f453-3e64-a5d2-0ba7ae0b4538@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b2404926-4b04-70a4-e648-ba13d3486f3f@mulle-kybernetik.com>
On 13/06/2019 19:53, Nat! wrote:
> Funnily enough, if you read the Itanium C++ ABI, on which __cxa_finalize is based, then the algorithm described
> there is doing exactly the right thing.
> Beause the wording of __cxa_finalize is so shortened, it its hard to pick out the original meaning. But the description is
> actually fully compatible with how `atexit` is supposed to function.
>
> The gist is this. For atexit, functions are stored in a unique way in the termination function table (clarifications in []):
>
> http://refspecs.linuxbase.org/LSB_5.0.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic.html#BASELIB---CXA-FINALIZE
>
> ```
> In the latter case [atexit] the pointer to the function is the pointer passed to atexit(), while the other pointers [operand, handle] are NULL.
> ```
>
> When dlclose hits, the handle to be closed is `d` and not NULL:
>
> ```
> The implementation shall arrange for__cxa_finalize() to be called during early shared library unload (e.g. dlclose()) with a handle to the shared library.
> ```
>
> And then
>
> ```
> When __cxa_finalize(d) is called, it shall walk the termination function list, calling each in turn if d matches the handle of the termination function entry.
> ```
>
> So `atexit`s don't match, since the handle stored is NULL. Only if `d` is NULL (the base process terminates), then will the atexits be called. Currently though at `dlclose` time all handlers are called, which breaks the `atexit` specification as well as your own LSB.
>
> Well it's a goof up, but FreeBSD and MacOS aren't doing any better.
>
The problem is currently for glibc atexit is implemented as __cxa_atexit as:
---
/* Register FUNC to be executed by `exit'. */
int
#ifndef atexit
attribute_hidden
#endif
atexit (void (*func) (void))
{
return __cxa_atexit ((void (*) (void *)) func, NULL, __dso_handle);
}
---
And linked against a glibc's provided static library (libc_nonshared.a).
The compiler then defines the __dso_handle variable to be an unique
value for each shared-object (on libgcc for gcc case), and the static
linking allows the atexit register to use that value.
This is due by design to make atexit work as __cxa_atexit created by
compiler itself.
What I advocate on a recent discussion on libc-alpha [1] is indeed to
follow what you described. My initial suggestion was to add atexit
handlers using a different mechanism, essentially they would be different
than __cxa_atexit handlers. This would make then not to be called
with __cxa_finalize (NULL), rather exit() will be responsible to actually
call them.
It causes a semantic change though: dlclose will need to actually remove
the atexit the shared library registers (because we can't potentially issue
a function callback where its texts has been 'unmaped'). That's why I think
we will need to use another symbol to register atexit handler, since we will
need to pass to libc the __dso_handler value to allow __cxa_finalize remove
the handler on dlclose.
I have a WIP patch to fix, I will push on a user branch if you want to
check this out.
[1] https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2019-06/msg00229.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-14 15:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-18 21:23 Nat!
2019-05-19 16:23 ` Florian Weimer
2019-05-19 19:37 ` Nat!
2019-05-21 20:43 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2019-05-22 10:22 ` Nat!
2019-05-22 15:01 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2019-05-22 15:29 ` Nat!
2019-05-22 19:35 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2019-05-29 21:16 ` Nat!
2019-06-09 20:59 ` Nat!
2019-06-10 11:48 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2019-06-10 13:08 ` Nat!
2019-06-10 20:27 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2019-06-11 18:39 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2019-06-11 20:20 ` Nat!
2019-06-11 22:40 ` Nat!
2019-06-12 3:41 ` Carlos O'Donell
2019-06-13 22:53 ` Nat!
2019-06-14 12:29 ` Manfred
2019-06-14 15:14 ` Adhemerval Zanella [this message]
2019-06-11 18:53 ` Nat!
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=a9533e7d-f453-3e64-a5d2-0ba7ae0b4538@linaro.org \
--to=adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org \
--cc=libc-help@sourceware.org \
/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).