PR for llvm/llvm-project#53571 #1
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Clang-format LLVM style has a custom include category for gtest/ and gmock/ headers between regular includes and angled includes. Do the same here. Fixes llvm#53525. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118913 (cherry picked from commit 0447ec2)
llvmbot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 10, 2022
We experienced some deadlocks when we used multiple threads for logging using `scan-builds` intercept-build tool when we used multiple threads by e.g. logging `make -j16` ``` (gdb) bt #0 0x00007f2bb3aff110 in __lll_lock_wait () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0 #1 0x00007f2bb3af70a3 in pthread_mutex_lock () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0 #2 0x00007f2bb3d152e4 in ?? () #3 0x00007ffcc5f0cc80 in ?? () #4 0x00007f2bb3d2bf5b in ?? () from /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 #5 0x00007f2bb3b5da27 in ?? () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 #6 0x00007f2bb3b5dbe0 in exit () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 #7 0x00007f2bb3d144ee in ?? () #8 0x746e692f706d742f in ?? () #9 0x692d747065637265 in ?? () #10 0x2f653631326b3034 in ?? () #11 0x646d632e35353532 in ?? () #12 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () ``` I think the gcc's exit call caused the injected `libear.so` to be unloaded by the `ld`, which in turn called the `void on_unload() __attribute__((destructor))`. That tried to acquire an already locked mutex which was left locked in the `bear_report_call()` call, that probably encountered some error and returned early when it forgot to unlock the mutex. All of these are speculation since from the backtrace I could not verify if frames 2 and 3 are in fact corresponding to the `libear.so` module. But I think it's a fairly safe bet. So, hereby I'm releasing the held mutex on *all paths*, even if some failure happens. PS: I would use lock_guards, but it's C. Reviewed-by: NoQ Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118439 (cherry picked from commit d919d02)
tstellar
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 14, 2022
We experienced some deadlocks when we used multiple threads for logging using `scan-builds` intercept-build tool when we used multiple threads by e.g. logging `make -j16` ``` (gdb) bt #0 0x00007f2bb3aff110 in __lll_lock_wait () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0 #1 0x00007f2bb3af70a3 in pthread_mutex_lock () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0 #2 0x00007f2bb3d152e4 in ?? () #3 0x00007ffcc5f0cc80 in ?? () #4 0x00007f2bb3d2bf5b in ?? () from /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 #5 0x00007f2bb3b5da27 in ?? () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 #6 0x00007f2bb3b5dbe0 in exit () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 #7 0x00007f2bb3d144ee in ?? () #8 0x746e692f706d742f in ?? () #9 0x692d747065637265 in ?? () #10 0x2f653631326b3034 in ?? () #11 0x646d632e35353532 in ?? () #12 0x0000000000000000 in ?? () ``` I think the gcc's exit call caused the injected `libear.so` to be unloaded by the `ld`, which in turn called the `void on_unload() __attribute__((destructor))`. That tried to acquire an already locked mutex which was left locked in the `bear_report_call()` call, that probably encountered some error and returned early when it forgot to unlock the mutex. All of these are speculation since from the backtrace I could not verify if frames 2 and 3 are in fact corresponding to the `libear.so` module. But I think it's a fairly safe bet. So, hereby I'm releasing the held mutex on *all paths*, even if some failure happens. PS: I would use lock_guards, but it's C. Reviewed-by: NoQ Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118439 (cherry picked from commit d919d02)
llvmbot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 24, 2024
…vm#75394) Calling one of pthread join/detach interceptor on an already joined/detached thread causes asserts such as: AddressSanitizer: CHECK failed: sanitizer_thread_arg_retval.cpp:56 "((t)) != (0)" (0x0, 0x0) (tid=1236094) #0 0x555555634f8b in __asan::CheckUnwind() compiler-rt/lib/asan/asan_rtl.cpp:69:3 #1 0x55555564e06e in __sanitizer::CheckFailed(char const*, int, char const*, unsigned long long, unsigned long long) compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_termination.cpp:86:24 #2 0x5555556491df in __sanitizer::ThreadArgRetval::BeforeJoin(unsigned long) const compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_thread_arg_retval.cpp:56:3 #3 0x5555556198ed in Join<___interceptor_pthread_tryjoin_np(void*, void**)::<lambda()> > compiler-rt/lib/asan/../sanitizer_common/sanitizer_thread_arg_retval.h:74:26 #4 0x5555556198ed in pthread_tryjoin_np compiler-rt/lib/asan/asan_interceptors.cpp:311:29 The assert are replaced by error codes.
llvmbot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 3, 2024
```
UBSan-Standalone-sparc :: TestCases/Misc/Linux/diag-stacktrace.cpp
```
`FAIL`s on 32 and 64-bit Linux/sparc64 (and on Solaris/sparcv9, too: the
test isn't Linux-specific at all). With
`UBSAN_OPTIONS=fast_unwind_on_fatal=1`, the stack trace shows a
duplicate innermost frame:
```
compiler-rt/test/ubsan/TestCases/Misc/Linux/diag-stacktrace.cpp:14:31: runtime error: execution reached the end of a value-returning function without returning a value
#0 0x7003a708 in f() compiler-rt/test/ubsan/TestCases/Misc/Linux/diag-stacktrace.cpp:14:35
#1 0x7003a708 in f() compiler-rt/test/ubsan/TestCases/Misc/Linux/diag-stacktrace.cpp:14:35
#2 0x7003a714 in g() compiler-rt/test/ubsan/TestCases/Misc/Linux/diag-stacktrace.cpp:17:38
```
which isn't seen with `fast_unwind_on_fatal=0`.
This turns out to be another fallout from fixing
`__builtin_return_address`/`__builtin_extract_return_addr` on SPARC. In
`sanitizer_stacktrace_sparc.cpp` (`BufferedStackTrace::UnwindFast`) the
`pc` arg is the return address, while `pc1` from the stack frame
(`fr_savpc`) is the address of the `call` insn, leading to a double
entry for the innermost frame in `trace_buffer[]`.
This patch fixes this by moving the adjustment before all uses.
Tested on `sparc64-unknown-linux-gnu` and `sparcv9-sun-solaris2.11`
(with the `ubsan/TestCases/Misc/Linux` tests enabled).
(cherry picked from commit 3368a32)
tru
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 4, 2024
```
UBSan-Standalone-sparc :: TestCases/Misc/Linux/diag-stacktrace.cpp
```
`FAIL`s on 32 and 64-bit Linux/sparc64 (and on Solaris/sparcv9, too: the
test isn't Linux-specific at all). With
`UBSAN_OPTIONS=fast_unwind_on_fatal=1`, the stack trace shows a
duplicate innermost frame:
```
compiler-rt/test/ubsan/TestCases/Misc/Linux/diag-stacktrace.cpp:14:31: runtime error: execution reached the end of a value-returning function without returning a value
#0 0x7003a708 in f() compiler-rt/test/ubsan/TestCases/Misc/Linux/diag-stacktrace.cpp:14:35
#1 0x7003a708 in f() compiler-rt/test/ubsan/TestCases/Misc/Linux/diag-stacktrace.cpp:14:35
#2 0x7003a714 in g() compiler-rt/test/ubsan/TestCases/Misc/Linux/diag-stacktrace.cpp:17:38
```
which isn't seen with `fast_unwind_on_fatal=0`.
This turns out to be another fallout from fixing
`__builtin_return_address`/`__builtin_extract_return_addr` on SPARC. In
`sanitizer_stacktrace_sparc.cpp` (`BufferedStackTrace::UnwindFast`) the
`pc` arg is the return address, while `pc1` from the stack frame
(`fr_savpc`) is the address of the `call` insn, leading to a double
entry for the innermost frame in `trace_buffer[]`.
This patch fixes this by moving the adjustment before all uses.
Tested on `sparc64-unknown-linux-gnu` and `sparcv9-sun-solaris2.11`
(with the `ubsan/TestCases/Misc/Linux` tests enabled).
(cherry picked from commit 3368a32)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
resolves llvm#53571