Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Enabling static-pie for musl #70740

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 19, 2020
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions src/librustc_target/spec/x86_64_unknown_linux_musl.rs
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ pub fn target() -> TargetResult {
base.max_atomic_width = Some(64);
base.pre_link_args.get_mut(&LinkerFlavor::Gcc).unwrap().push("-m64".to_string());
base.stack_probes = true;
base.static_position_independent_executables = true;

Ok(Target {
llvm_target: "x86_64-unknown-linux-musl".to_string(),
Expand Down
15 changes: 15 additions & 0 deletions src/test/run-make/static-pie/Makefile
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
-include ../../run-make-fulldeps/tools.mk

# only-x86_64-unknown-linux-musl

# How to manually run this
# $ ./x.py test --target x86_64-unknown-linux-musl src/test/run-make/static-pie

all:
$(RUSTC) --target $(TARGET) -C target-feature=+crt-static test-aslr.rs
# Check that no dynamic interpreter is set
! readelf -l $(call RUN_BINFILE,test-aslr) | $(CGREP) INTERP
# Check that we have a dynamic executable
readelf -l $(call RUN_BINFILE,test-aslr) | $(CGREP) DYNAMIC
# Check for address space layout randomization
$(call RUN,test-aslr) --test-aslr
43 changes: 43 additions & 0 deletions src/test/run-make/static-pie/test-aslr.rs
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
const NUM_RUNS: usize = 10;

fn run_self(exe: &str) -> usize {
use std::process::Command;
let mut set = std::collections::HashSet::new();

let mut cmd = Command::new(exe);
cmd.arg("--report");
(0..NUM_RUNS).for_each(|_| {
set.insert(cmd.output().expect("failed to execute process").stdout);
});
set.len()
}

fn main() {
let mut args = std::env::args();
let arg0 = args.next().unwrap();
match args.next() {
Some(s) if s.eq("--report") => {
println!("main = {:#?}", &main as *const _);
}
Some(s) if s.eq("--test-no-aslr") => {
let cnt = run_self(&arg0);
if cnt != 1 {
eprintln!("FAIL: {} most likely ASLR", arg0);
std::process::exit(1);
}
println!("PASS: {} does no ASLR", arg0);
}
Some(s) if s.eq("--test-aslr") => {
let cnt = run_self(&arg0);
if cnt != NUM_RUNS {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure this won't be a subject to birthday paradox occasionally, causing spurious failures. (I didn't calculate the exact probability though. Are all pages equally probable with ASLR?)

Perhaps cnt == 1 would be more reliable.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll fix this in a follow-up PR

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Or to give credit, you should fix it 😄

eprintln!("FAIL: {} most likely no ASLR", arg0);
std::process::exit(1);
}
println!("PASS: {} does ASLR", arg0);
}
Some(_) | None => {
println!("Usage: {} --test-no-aslr | --test-aslr", arg0);
std::process::exit(1);
}
}
}