Web lists-archives.com

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] TEST RELEASE: Cygwin 2.10.0-0.1




On 1/20/2018 6:49 PM, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 1/20/2018 7:23 AM, Ken Brown wrote:
>> On 1/19/2018 10:27 PM, Ken Brown wrote:
>>> On 1/18/2018 6:28 PM, Ken Brown wrote:
>>>> On 1/18/2018 4:30 PM, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
>>>>> On 2018-01-18 08:35, Ken Brown wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/17/2018 5:29 PM, Ken Brown wrote:
>>>>>>> Do we need a new gcc release to go along with the recent ssp 
>>>>>>> changes?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The following commit message seems to answer my question:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>      Note that this does require building gcc with 
>>>>>> --disable-libssp and
>>>>>>      gcc_cv_libc_provides_ssp=yes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Correct.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Are there plans to coordinate the release of Cygwin 2.10.0 with a new
>>>>>> gcc release?  In the meantime, I guess package maintainers have to 
>>>>>> build
>>>>>> with -U_FORTIFY_SOURCE in order to test building with Cygwin 
>>>>>> 2.10.0.  Or
>>>>>> am I missing something?
>>>>>
>>>>> -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE is not the default, so simply omitting it is
>>>>> sufficient.
>>>>
>>>> I was talking about building projects in which _FORTIFY_SOURCE is 
>>>> defined by default.  That happens, for instance, in the gnulib 
>>>> subdirectory of the emacs tree, so it may affect other projects that 
>>>> use gnulib also.
>>>>
>>>>> You could also just delete
>>>>> /usr/lib/gcc/*-pc-cygwin/6.4.0/include/ssp, since we won't need it
>>>>> anymore and it wasn't even being used properly in the first place.
>>>>
>>>> That's a simpler workaround than what I was doing.  Thanks.
>>>
>>> Here's another issue that's come up with _FORTIFY_SOURCE.  One of the 
>>> emacs source files, fileio.c, makes use of a pointer to readlinkat. 
>>> [More precisely, the file uses an external function foo() with a 
>>> parameter 'bar' that's a pointer to a function; foo is called in 
>>> fileio.c with bar = readlinkat.]
>>>
>>> When _FORTIFY_SOURCE > 0, this leads to an "undefined reference to 
>>> `__ssp_protected_readlinkat'" linking error.  Does this sound like 
>>> something that will be fixed with the new gcc release?
>>>
>>> I realize I haven't given you full details, but it might be a few 
>>> days until I have a chance to extract an STC for this issue, so I 
>>> thought I'd give it a shot.
>>>
>>> If you can't answer the question based on the information above, I'll 
>>> make an STC as soon as I can.
>>
>> I got to this sooner than expected:
>>
>> $ cat ssp_test.c
>> #define  _FORTIFY_SOURCE 1
>> #include <unistd.h>
>> void foo (ssize_t (*preadlinkat) (int, char const *, char *, size_t));
>>
>> void baz ()
>> {
>>    foo (readlinkat);
>> }
>>
>> $ gcc -c -O1 ssp_test.c
>>
>> $ objdump -x ssp_test.o | grep readlinkat
>>    6 .rdata$.refptr.__ssp_protected_readlinkat 00000010 
>> 0000000000000000  0000000000000000  00000180  2**4
>> [...]

The following patch seems to fix the problem:

--- ssp.h~      2018-01-22 09:18:18.000000000 -0500
+++ ssp.h       2018-01-24 13:44:55.856635800 -0500
@@ -41,7 +41,7 @@
 #endif
 #define __ssp_real(fun)                __ssp_real_(fun)

-#define __ssp_inline extern __inline__ __attribute__((__always_inline__, __gnu_inline__))
+#define __ssp_inline extern __inline__ __attribute__((__always_inline__))

 #define __ssp_bos(ptr) __builtin_object_size(ptr, __SSP_FORTIFY_LEVEL > 1)
 #define __ssp_bos0(ptr) __builtin_object_size(ptr, 0)

I arrived at this by comparing Cygwin's ssp.h with NetBSD's, on which
Cygwin's was based, and I noticed that NetBSD didn't use __gnu_inline__.
Yaakov, is there a reason that Cygwin needs __gnu_inline__?  It apparently
prevents fortified functions from being used as function pointers.

Using my test case again, here's what happens with and without __gnu_inline__:

With:
$ gcc -O1 -c ssp_test.c && objdump -x ssp_test.o | grep readlinkat
  6 .rdata$.refptr.__ssp_protected_readlinkat 00000010  0000000000000000  0000000000000000  00000180  2**4
                  CONTENTS, ALLOC, LOAD, RELOC, READONLY, DATA, LINK_ONCE_DISCARD (COMDAT .refptr.__ssp_protected_readlinkat 18)
[  4](sec  7)(fl 0x00)(ty   0)(scl   3) (nx 1) 0x0000000000000000 .rdata$.refptr.__ssp_protected_readlinkat
[ 18](sec  7)(fl 0x00)(ty   0)(scl   2) (nx 0) 0x0000000000000000 .refptr.__ssp_protected_readlinkat
[ 19](sec  0)(fl 0x00)(ty   0)(scl   2) (nx 0) 0x0000000000000000 __ssp_protected_readlinkat
0000000000000007 R_X86_64_PC32     __ssp_protected_readlinkat
RELOCATION RECORDS FOR [.rdata$.refptr.__ssp_protected_readlinkat]:
0000000000000000 R_X86_64_64       __ssp_protected_readlinkat

Without:
$ gcc -O1 -c ssp_test.c && objdump -x ssp_test.o | grep readlinkat
[  2](sec  1)(fl 0x00)(ty  20)(scl   2) (nx 1) 0x0000000000000000 __ssp_protected_readlinkat
[ 27](sec  0)(fl 0x00)(ty   0)(scl   2) (nx 0) 0x0000000000000000 readlinkat
0000000000000005 R_X86_64_PC32     readlinkat

Ken

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple