* [rfa/gdbserver] Fix crash in thread_db_get_tls_address
@ 2009-01-21 22:57 Ulrich Weigand
2009-01-22 9:18 ` Doug Evans
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Ulrich Weigand @ 2009-01-21 22:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches; +Cc: drow
Hello,
when debugging remotely using a GDB with private modifcations, I'm running
into a crash in gdbserver, which I believe to be a real bug (even if latent
with mainline GDB).
The problem occurs when the thread_db_get_tls_address routine is invoked
(as a result of processing a qGetTLSAddr: query) on an inferior that
actually has no threads (or where the thread layer is not initialized yet).
This is caused by thread_db_get_tls_address calling find_one_thread,
which in the end calls down into the libthread_db td_ta_map_lwp2thr
routine -- at a time libthread_db is not yet initialized, and in fact
the "thread_agent" handle passed to td_ta_map_lwp2thr was not yet
set up. This results in a segfault within libthread_db.
Now I guess it is debatable whether or not sending a qGetTLSAddr:
query in this situation is a useful thing, but it seems to me that
gdbserver shouldn't just *crash* ...
The following patch fixes this by returning failure from
thread_db_get_tls_address if called before the thread layer
is properly initialized.
Tested on powerpc64-linux (64-bit / 32-bit) using local gdbserver.
OK for mainline?
Bye,
Ulrich
ChangeLog:
* thread-db.c (thread_db_get_tls_address): Do not crash if
called when thread layer is not yet initialized.
Index: src/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c
===================================================================
--- src.orig/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c
+++ src/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c
@@ -388,6 +388,10 @@ thread_db_get_tls_address (struct thread
td_err_e err;
struct process_info *process;
+ /* If the thread layer is not (yet) initialized, fail. */
+ if (!all_symbols_looked_up)
+ return -1;
+
process = get_thread_process (thread);
if (!process->thread_known)
find_one_thread (process->lwpid);
--
Dr. Ulrich Weigand
GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE
Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [rfa/gdbserver] Fix crash in thread_db_get_tls_address 2009-01-21 22:57 [rfa/gdbserver] Fix crash in thread_db_get_tls_address Ulrich Weigand @ 2009-01-22 9:18 ` Doug Evans 2009-01-22 15:06 ` Ulrich Weigand 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Doug Evans @ 2009-01-22 9:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ulrich Weigand; +Cc: gdb-patches, drow On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Ulrich Weigand <uweigand@de.ibm.com> wrote: > Hello, > > when debugging remotely using a GDB with private modifcations, I'm running > into a crash in gdbserver, which I believe to be a real bug (even if latent > with mainline GDB). > > The problem occurs when the thread_db_get_tls_address routine is invoked > (as a result of processing a qGetTLSAddr: query) on an inferior that > actually has no threads (or where the thread layer is not initialized yet). > > This is caused by thread_db_get_tls_address calling find_one_thread, > which in the end calls down into the libthread_db td_ta_map_lwp2thr > routine -- at a time libthread_db is not yet initialized, and in fact > the "thread_agent" handle passed to td_ta_map_lwp2thr was not yet > set up. This results in a segfault within libthread_db. > > Now I guess it is debatable whether or not sending a qGetTLSAddr: > query in this situation is a useful thing, but it seems to me that > gdbserver shouldn't just *crash* ... > > The following patch fixes this by returning failure from > thread_db_get_tls_address if called before the thread layer > is properly initialized. > > > Tested on powerpc64-linux (64-bit / 32-bit) using local gdbserver. > > OK for mainline? > > Bye, > Ulrich > > > ChangeLog: > > * thread-db.c (thread_db_get_tls_address): Do not crash if > called when thread layer is not yet initialized. > > > Index: src/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c > =================================================================== > --- src.orig/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c > +++ src/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c > @@ -388,6 +388,10 @@ thread_db_get_tls_address (struct thread > td_err_e err; > struct process_info *process; > > + /* If the thread layer is not (yet) initialized, fail. */ > + if (!all_symbols_looked_up) > + return -1; > + > process = get_thread_process (thread); > if (!process->thread_known) > find_one_thread (process->lwpid); > -- > Dr. Ulrich Weigand > GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE > Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com > Hi. I've run into similar situations with the thread layer not yet initialized. One aspect of this patch is a bit confusing. Maybe a comment is warranted. Returning -1 will cause server.c:handle_query to mark the packet as unknown which will in turn cause remote.c:packet_ok to mark the packet as disabled (on the gdb side). How does the packet get re-enabled if the thread layer is later initialized? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [rfa/gdbserver] Fix crash in thread_db_get_tls_address 2009-01-22 9:18 ` Doug Evans @ 2009-01-22 15:06 ` Ulrich Weigand 2009-01-23 1:08 ` Doug Evans 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Ulrich Weigand @ 2009-01-22 15:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Doug Evans; +Cc: gdb-patches, drow Doug Evans wrote: > Hi. I've run into similar situations with the thread layer not yet > initialized. One aspect of this patch is a bit confusing. Maybe a > comment is warranted. > > Returning -1 will cause server.c:handle_query to mark the packet as > unknown which will in turn cause remote.c:packet_ok to mark the packet > as disabled (on the gdb side). How does the packet get re-enabled if > the thread layer is later initialized? You're right -- I missed that. I guess we need to report an error instead of marking the packet as unknown. The following patch is changed to use TD_ERR ("generic error" seems to be the best response -- I don't see a more specific code that would be appropriate here). Retested on powerpc64-linux (64-bit / 32-bit) with local gdbserver. Bye, Ulrich ChangeLog: * thread-db.c (thread_db_get_tls_address): Do not crash if called when thread layer is not yet initialized. Index: src/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c =================================================================== --- src.orig/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c +++ src/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c @@ -388,6 +388,10 @@ thread_db_get_tls_address (struct thread td_err_e err; struct process_info *process; + /* If the thread layer is not (yet) initialized, fail. */ + if (!all_symbols_looked_up) + return TD_ERR; + process = get_thread_process (thread); if (!process->thread_known) find_one_thread (process->lwpid); -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [rfa/gdbserver] Fix crash in thread_db_get_tls_address 2009-01-22 15:06 ` Ulrich Weigand @ 2009-01-23 1:08 ` Doug Evans 2009-04-03 18:07 ` [rfa/gdbserver] Updated: " Ulrich Weigand 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Doug Evans @ 2009-01-23 1:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ulrich Weigand; +Cc: gdb-patches, drow On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 7:05 AM, Ulrich Weigand <uweigand@de.ibm.com> wrote: > Doug Evans wrote: > >> Hi. I've run into similar situations with the thread layer not yet >> initialized. One aspect of this patch is a bit confusing. Maybe a >> comment is warranted. >> >> Returning -1 will cause server.c:handle_query to mark the packet as >> unknown which will in turn cause remote.c:packet_ok to mark the packet >> as disabled (on the gdb side). How does the packet get re-enabled if >> the thread layer is later initialized? > > You're right -- I missed that. I guess we need to report an error > instead of marking the packet as unknown. > > The following patch is changed to use TD_ERR ("generic error" seems to > be the best response -- I don't see a more specific code that would be > appropriate here). > > Retested on powerpc64-linux (64-bit / 32-bit) with local gdbserver. I don't know if there's a better value to use here either. Maybe TD_TLSDEFER, but I'm just guessing (and I don't know how portable it is). > > Bye, > Ulrich > > > ChangeLog: > > * thread-db.c (thread_db_get_tls_address): Do not crash if > called when thread layer is not yet initialized. > > > Index: src/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c > =================================================================== > --- src.orig/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c > +++ src/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c > @@ -388,6 +388,10 @@ thread_db_get_tls_address (struct thread > td_err_e err; > struct process_info *process; > > + /* If the thread layer is not (yet) initialized, fail. */ > + if (!all_symbols_looked_up) > + return TD_ERR; > + > process = get_thread_process (thread); > if (!process->thread_known) > find_one_thread (process->lwpid); > > > -- > Dr. Ulrich Weigand > GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE > Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [rfa/gdbserver] Updated: Fix crash in thread_db_get_tls_address 2009-01-23 1:08 ` Doug Evans @ 2009-04-03 18:07 ` Ulrich Weigand 2009-04-03 18:26 ` Pedro Alves 2009-04-03 18:29 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 0 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Ulrich Weigand @ 2009-04-03 18:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gdb-patches, drow, dje Doug Evans wrote: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 7:05 AM, Ulrich Weigand <uweigand@de.ibm.com> wrote: > > Doug Evans wrote: > > > >> Hi. I've run into similar situations with the thread layer not yet > >> initialized. One aspect of this patch is a bit confusing. Maybe a > >> comment is warranted. > >> > >> Returning -1 will cause server.c:handle_query to mark the packet as > >> unknown which will in turn cause remote.c:packet_ok to mark the packet > >> as disabled (on the gdb side). How does the packet get re-enabled if > >> the thread layer is later initialized? > > > > You're right -- I missed that. I guess we need to report an error > > instead of marking the packet as unknown. > > > > The following patch is changed to use TD_ERR ("generic error" seems to > > be the best response -- I don't see a more specific code that would be > > appropriate here). > > > > Retested on powerpc64-linux (64-bit / 32-bit) with local gdbserver. > > I don't know if there's a better value to use here either. Maybe > TD_TLSDEFER, but I'm just guessing (and I don't know how portable it > is). TD_TLSDEFER doesn't seem to be available everywhere, and has a somewhat different meaning, I think. In any case, it doesn't really matter, as GDB will currently throw a TLS_GENERIC_ERROR in remote.c no matter what error code is returned ... I've updated the patch to account for multi-process changes. Retested on powerpc64-linux (64-bit / 32-bit) with local gdbserver. Dan, is this OK for mainline? Bye, Ulrich ChangeLog: * thread-db.c (thread_db_get_tls_address): Do not crash if called when thread layer is not yet initialized. Index: src/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c =================================================================== --- src.orig/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c +++ src/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c @@ -382,6 +382,10 @@ thread_db_get_tls_address (struct thread struct lwp_info *lwp; struct thread_info *saved_inferior; + /* If the thread layer is not (yet) initialized, fail. */ + if (!current_process()->all_symbols_looked_up) + return TD_ERR; + lwp = get_thread_lwp (thread); if (!lwp->thread_known) find_one_thread (lwp->head.id); -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [rfa/gdbserver] Updated: Fix crash in thread_db_get_tls_address 2009-04-03 18:07 ` [rfa/gdbserver] Updated: " Ulrich Weigand @ 2009-04-03 18:26 ` Pedro Alves 2009-04-03 19:20 ` Ulrich Weigand 2009-04-03 18:29 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Pedro Alves @ 2009-04-03 18:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gdb-patches; +Cc: Ulrich Weigand, drow, dje On Friday 03 April 2009 19:06:55, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > Index: src/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c > =================================================================== > --- src.orig/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c > +++ src/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c > @@ -382,6 +382,10 @@ thread_db_get_tls_address (struct thread > struct lwp_info *lwp; > struct thread_info *saved_inferior; > > + /* If the thread layer is not (yet) initialized, fail. */ > + if (!current_process()->all_symbols_looked_up) > + return TD_ERR; > + (note the missing space after current_process) The qGetTLSAddr packet takes an explicit thread id, so in this case, it may be that the current process isn't the correct one. I think in this case the best would be to inferior.c:get_thread_process and use that, like: if (!get_thread_process (thread)->all_symbols_looked_up) return TD_ERR; Alternatively you could make sure you call current_process (), after temporarily having switched the current inferior, like we do a bit below. Sorry for the extra work... -- Pedro Alves ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [rfa/gdbserver] Updated: Fix crash in thread_db_get_tls_address 2009-04-03 18:26 ` Pedro Alves @ 2009-04-03 19:20 ` Ulrich Weigand 2009-04-03 19:24 ` Pedro Alves 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Ulrich Weigand @ 2009-04-03 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pedro Alves; +Cc: gdb-patches, drow, dje Pedro Alves wrote: > The qGetTLSAddr packet takes an explicit thread id, so in this > case, it may be that the current process isn't the > correct one. I think in this case the best would be to > inferior.c:get_thread_process and use that, like: > > if (!get_thread_process (thread)->all_symbols_looked_up) > return TD_ERR; That function is currently static to inferior.c; I guess it should be exported? > Alternatively you could make sure you call current_process (), > after temporarily having switched the current inferior, like > we do a bit below. Hmm, I want to guard against find_one_thread blowing up due to a NULL proc->thread_agent -- but "proc" is always refering to current_process () as well. This is probably incorrect too, and find_one_thread ought to use get_thread_process? Bye, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [rfa/gdbserver] Updated: Fix crash in thread_db_get_tls_address 2009-04-03 19:20 ` Ulrich Weigand @ 2009-04-03 19:24 ` Pedro Alves 2009-04-03 20:17 ` Ulrich Weigand 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Pedro Alves @ 2009-04-03 19:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gdb-patches; +Cc: Ulrich Weigand, drow, dje A Friday 03 April 2009 20:20:09, Ulrich Weigand escreveu: > Pedro Alves wrote: > > > The qGetTLSAddr packet takes an explicit thread id, so in this > > case, it may be that the current process isn't the > > correct one. I think in this case the best would be to > > inferior.c:get_thread_process and use that, like: ^ export > > > > if (!get_thread_process (thread)->all_symbols_looked_up) > > return TD_ERR; > > That function is currently static to inferior.c; I guess it > should be exported? Yes. That's what I meant, but fingers slipped. :-) > > Alternatively you could make sure you call current_process (), > > after temporarily having switched the current inferior, like > > we do a bit below. > > Hmm, I want to guard against find_one_thread blowing up due to > a NULL proc->thread_agent -- but "proc" is always refering to > current_process () as well. This is probably incorrect too, > and find_one_thread ought to use get_thread_process? Indeed. -- Pedro Alves ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [rfa/gdbserver] Updated: Fix crash in thread_db_get_tls_address 2009-04-03 19:24 ` Pedro Alves @ 2009-04-03 20:17 ` Ulrich Weigand 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Ulrich Weigand @ 2009-04-03 20:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pedro Alves; +Cc: gdb-patches, drow, dje Pedro Alves wrote: > A Friday 03 April 2009 20:20:09, Ulrich Weigand escreveu: > > Pedro Alves wrote: > > > > > The qGetTLSAddr packet takes an explicit thread id, so in this > > > case, it may be that the current process isn't the > > > correct one. I think in this case the best would be to > > > inferior.c:get_thread_process and use that, like: > > ^ export > > > > > > > if (!get_thread_process (thread)->all_symbols_looked_up) > > > return TD_ERR; > > > > That function is currently static to inferior.c; I guess it > > should be exported? > > Yes. That's what I meant, but fingers slipped. :-) > > > > Alternatively you could make sure you call current_process (), > > > after temporarily having switched the current inferior, like > > > we do a bit below. > > > > Hmm, I want to guard against find_one_thread blowing up due to > > a NULL proc->thread_agent -- but "proc" is always refering to > > current_process () as well. This is probably incorrect too, > > and find_one_thread ought to use get_thread_process? > > Indeed. OK, here's the version I've just committed. Retested on powerpc64-linux (64-bit and 32-bit) with local gdbserver. Thanks, Ulrich ChangeLog: * inferiors.c (get_thread_process): Make global. * server.h (get_thread_process): Add prototype. * thread-db.c (find_one_thread): Use get_thread_process instead of current_process. (thread_db_get_tls_address): Do not crash if called when thread layer is not yet initialized. Index: gdb/gdbserver/inferiors.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/gdbserver/inferiors.c,v retrieving revision 1.19 diff -u -p -r1.19 inferiors.c --- gdb/gdbserver/inferiors.c 1 Apr 2009 22:50:24 -0000 1.19 +++ gdb/gdbserver/inferiors.c 3 Apr 2009 19:47:11 -0000 @@ -442,7 +442,7 @@ find_process_pid (int pid) find_inferior_id (&all_processes, pid_to_ptid (pid)); } -static struct process_info * +struct process_info * get_thread_process (struct thread_info *thread) { int pid = ptid_get_pid (thread->entry.id); Index: gdb/gdbserver/server.h =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/gdbserver/server.h,v retrieving revision 1.55 diff -u -p -r1.55 server.h --- gdb/gdbserver/server.h 1 Apr 2009 22:50:24 -0000 1.55 +++ gdb/gdbserver/server.h 3 Apr 2009 19:47:11 -0000 @@ -201,6 +201,7 @@ struct process_info no current thread selected. */ struct process_info *current_process (void); +struct process_info *get_thread_process (struct thread_info *); #include "regcache.h" #include "gdb/signals.h" Index: gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c,v retrieving revision 1.22 diff -u -p -r1.22 thread-db.c --- gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c 1 Apr 2009 22:50:24 -0000 1.22 +++ gdb/gdbserver/thread-db.c 3 Apr 2009 19:47:11 -0000 @@ -233,7 +233,7 @@ find_one_thread (ptid_t ptid) td_err_e err; struct thread_info *inferior; struct lwp_info *lwp; - struct process_info_private *proc = current_process()->private; + struct process_info_private *proc; int lwpid = ptid_get_lwp (ptid); inferior = (struct thread_info *) find_inferior_id (&all_threads, ptid); @@ -242,6 +242,7 @@ find_one_thread (ptid_t ptid) return 1; /* Get information about this thread. */ + proc = get_thread_process (inferior)->private; err = td_ta_map_lwp2thr (proc->thread_agent, lwpid, &th); if (err != TD_OK) error ("Cannot get thread handle for LWP %d: %s", @@ -382,6 +383,10 @@ thread_db_get_tls_address (struct thread struct lwp_info *lwp; struct thread_info *saved_inferior; + /* If the thread layer is not (yet) initialized, fail. */ + if (!get_thread_process (thread)->all_symbols_looked_up) + return TD_ERR; + lwp = get_thread_lwp (thread); if (!lwp->thread_known) find_one_thread (lwp->head.id); -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [rfa/gdbserver] Updated: Fix crash in thread_db_get_tls_address 2009-04-03 18:07 ` [rfa/gdbserver] Updated: " Ulrich Weigand 2009-04-03 18:26 ` Pedro Alves @ 2009-04-03 18:29 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2009-04-03 18:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ulrich Weigand; +Cc: gdb-patches, dje On Fri, Apr 03, 2009 at 08:06:55PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > Dan, is this OK for mainline? Yes, this looks fine to me. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-04-03 20:17 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2009-01-21 22:57 [rfa/gdbserver] Fix crash in thread_db_get_tls_address Ulrich Weigand 2009-01-22 9:18 ` Doug Evans 2009-01-22 15:06 ` Ulrich Weigand 2009-01-23 1:08 ` Doug Evans 2009-04-03 18:07 ` [rfa/gdbserver] Updated: " Ulrich Weigand 2009-04-03 18:26 ` Pedro Alves 2009-04-03 19:20 ` Ulrich Weigand 2009-04-03 19:24 ` Pedro Alves 2009-04-03 20:17 ` Ulrich Weigand 2009-04-03 18:29 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox