* Re: [patch] nto target: fix null pointer dereference
@ 2008-08-12 18:33 Ulrich Weigand
2008-08-12 21:26 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Ulrich Weigand @ 2008-08-12 18:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: aristovski; +Cc: gdb-patches
Aleksandar Ristovski wrote:
>diff -u -p -r1.25 nto-tdep.c
>--- gdb/nto-tdep.c 23 Jul 2008 13:36:00 -0000 1.25
>+++ gdb/nto-tdep.c 12 Aug 2008 16:33:18 -0000
>@@ -266,6 +266,8 @@ LM_ADDR (struct so_list *so)
> {
> struct link_map_offsets *lmo = nto_fetch_link_map_offsets ();
>
>+ if (so->lm_info->lm == NULL)
>+ return 0;
> return extract_typed_address (so->lm_info->lm + lmo->l_addr_offset,
> builtin_type_void_data_ptr);
> }
I'm wondering how this can ever be NULL ... I understand nto
reuses the solib-svr4.c version of current_sos, which seems
to always initalize the lm member.
Can you explain what the situation is that leads to a NULL
pointer here?
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] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [patch] nto target: fix null pointer dereference
2008-08-12 18:33 [patch] nto target: fix null pointer dereference Ulrich Weigand
@ 2008-08-12 21:26 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
2008-08-12 21:32 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Aleksandar Ristovski @ 2008-08-12 21:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Aleksandar Ristovski wrote:
>
>> diff -u -p -r1.25 nto-tdep.c
>> --- gdb/nto-tdep.c 23 Jul 2008 13:36:00 -0000 1.25
>> +++ gdb/nto-tdep.c 12 Aug 2008 16:33:18 -0000
>> @@ -266,6 +266,8 @@ LM_ADDR (struct so_list *so)
>> {
>> struct link_map_offsets *lmo = nto_fetch_link_map_offsets ();
>>
>> + if (so->lm_info->lm == NULL)
>> + return 0;
>> return extract_typed_address (so->lm_info->lm + lmo->l_addr_offset,
>> builtin_type_void_data_ptr);
>> }
>
> I'm wondering how this can ever be NULL ... I understand nto
> reuses the solib-svr4.c version of current_sos, which seems
> to always initalize the lm member.
>
> Can you explain what the situation is that leads to a NULL
> pointer here?
>
Your question made me go through the issue again.
To create inferior, we use spawnp. spawnp will do something like mmap the binary and that's pretty much it (DT_DEBUG in .dynamic will contain NULL pointer).
in procfs_create_inferior we call solib_create_inferior_hook, which will end up trying to determine loader base by reading inferior's memory at DT_DEBUG pointer. In our case, before the executable actually started executing, it will successfully read 0s, because dynamic loader has not been invoked yet, and the pointer to r_debug structure is not initialized.
Thanks,
Aleksandar
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [patch] nto target: fix null pointer dereference
2008-08-12 21:26 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
@ 2008-08-12 21:32 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-08-13 15:47 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2008-08-12 21:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Aleksandar Ristovski; +Cc: gdb-patches
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 05:25:40PM -0400, Aleksandar Ristovski wrote:
> in procfs_create_inferior we call solib_create_inferior_hook, which will end up trying to determine loader base by reading inferior's memory at DT_DEBUG pointer. In our case, before the executable actually started executing, it will successfully read 0s, because dynamic loader has not been invoked yet, and the pointer to r_debug structure is not initialized.
It should already detect that zero is invalid, since that's the same
value used initially; see e.g. calls to locate_base. Where's the read
come from?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] nto target: fix null pointer dereference
2008-08-12 21:32 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
@ 2008-08-13 15:47 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Aleksandar Ristovski @ 2008-08-13 15:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches; +Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 05:25:40PM -0400, Aleksandar Ristovski wrote:
>> in procfs_create_inferior we call solib_create_inferior_hook, which will end up trying to determine loader base by reading inferior's memory at DT_DEBUG pointer. In our case, before the executable actually started executing, it will successfully read 0s, because dynamic loader has not been invoked yet, and the pointer to r_debug structure is not initialized.
>
> It should already detect that zero is invalid, since that's the same
> value used initially; see e.g. calls to locate_base. Where's the read
> come from?
>
nto_procfs.c::LM_ADDR gets called only by nto_relocate_section_addresses which replaces svr4_relocate_section_addresses. There is a slight difference in the way we treat l_addr address comparing to svr4.
I will repost modified patch shortly.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] nto target: fix null pointer dereference
@ 2008-08-14 20:51 Ulrich Weigand
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Ulrich Weigand @ 2008-08-14 20:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: aristovski; +Cc: gdb-patches
Aleksandar Ristovski wrote:
>2008-08-14 Aleksandar Ristovski <aristovski@qnx.com>
>
> * nto-tdep.c (lm_info): Updated struct lm_info definition from
> solib-svr4.c
> (LM_ADDR): Use l_addr if available; if not, use link map and set l_addr.
This is OK, thanks!
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] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] nto target: fix null pointer dereference
@ 2008-08-13 13:30 Ulrich Weigand
2008-08-13 15:50 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Ulrich Weigand @ 2008-08-13 13:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: aristovski; +Cc: gdb-patches
Aleksandar Ristovski wrote:
> Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > Can you explain what the situation is that leads to a NULL
> > pointer here?
>
> Your question made me go through the issue again.
>
> To create inferior, we use spawnp. spawnp will do something like mmap
> the binary and that's pretty much it (DT_DEBUG in .dynamic will contain
> NULL pointer).
>
> In procfs_create_inferior we call solib_create_inferior_hook, which will
> end up trying to determine loader base by reading inferior's memory at
> DT_DEBUG pointer. In our case, before the executable actually started
> executing, it will successfully read 0s, because dynamic loader has not
> been invoked yet, and the pointer to r_debug structure is not initialized.
I see. However, so->lm_info->lm should still be always allocated by the
common solib-svr4.c routines (see svr4_current_sos):
new->lm_info->l_addr = (CORE_ADDR)-1;
new->lm_info->lm_addr = lm;
new->lm_info->lm = xzalloc (lmo->link_map_size);
The only case where it is not allocated is in svr4_default_sos (which I
guess can happen in your case if the loader base is not found).
However, there the comment says:
/* Nothing will ever check the cached copy of the link
map if we set l_addr. */
new->lm_info->l_addr = debug_loader_offset;
new->lm_info->lm_addr = 0;
new->lm_info->lm = NULL;
Note the assumption that <lm> is only every used if <l_addr> is
not equal to -1. This is also what the solib-svr4.c implementation
of LM_ADDR_CHECK does.
It seems the main problem is that NTO at some time copied some of
the logic from solib-svr4.c, but has not adapted to the changes that
were added to that file later on. Not even the definition of struct
lm_info matches any more!
Maybe a more correct fix would be to mimic the new solib-svr4.c logic
and use the l_addr field to cache the load address?
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] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [patch] nto target: fix null pointer dereference
2008-08-13 13:30 Ulrich Weigand
@ 2008-08-13 15:50 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
2008-08-14 20:46 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Aleksandar Ristovski @ 2008-08-13 15:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 480 bytes --]
Ulrich Weigand wrote:
>
> It seems the main problem is that NTO at some time copied some of
> the logic from solib-svr4.c, but has not adapted to the changes that
> were added to that file later on. Not even the definition of struct
> lm_info matches any more!
>
> Maybe a more correct fix would be to mimic the new solib-svr4.c logic
> and use the l_addr field to cache the load address?
>
You are right. This is what I did in the new patch (attached).
Thanks,
Aleksandar
[-- Attachment #2: nto-tdep.c.200808131121.diff.ChangeLog --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 193 bytes --]
2008-08-13 Aleksandar Ristovski <aristovski@qnx.com>
* nto-tdep.c (lm_info): Updated struct lm_info definition from
solib-svr4.c
(LM_ADDR): Use l_addr if available; if not, use link map.
[-- Attachment #3: nto-tdep.c.200808131121.diff --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1969 bytes --]
Index: gdb/nto-tdep.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/nto-tdep.c,v
retrieving revision 1.25
diff -u -p -r1.25 nto-tdep.c
--- gdb/nto-tdep.c 23 Jul 2008 13:36:00 -0000 1.25
+++ gdb/nto-tdep.c 13 Aug 2008 15:21:20 -0000
@@ -253,21 +253,39 @@ nto_parse_redirection (char *pargv[], co
solib-svr4.c to support nto_relocate_section_addresses
which is different from the svr4 version. */
+/* Link map info to include in an allocated so_list entry */
+
struct lm_info
-{
- /* Pointer to copy of link map from inferior. The type is char *
- rather than void *, so that we may use byte offsets to find the
- various fields without the need for a cast. */
- char *lm;
-};
+ {
+ /* Pointer to copy of link map from inferior. The type is char *
+ rather than void *, so that we may use byte offsets to find the
+ various fields without the need for a cast. */
+ gdb_byte *lm;
+
+ /* Amount by which addresses in the binary should be relocated to
+ match the inferior. This could most often be taken directly
+ from lm, but when prelinking is involved and the prelink base
+ address changes, we may need a different offset, we want to
+ warn about the difference and compute it only once. */
+ CORE_ADDR l_addr;
+
+ /* The target location of lm. */
+ CORE_ADDR lm_addr;
+ };
+
static CORE_ADDR
LM_ADDR (struct so_list *so)
{
- struct link_map_offsets *lmo = nto_fetch_link_map_offsets ();
+ if (so->lm_info->l_addr == (CORE_ADDR)-1)
+ {
+ struct link_map_offsets *lmo = nto_fetch_link_map_offsets ();
- return extract_typed_address (so->lm_info->lm + lmo->l_addr_offset,
- builtin_type_void_data_ptr);
+ return extract_typed_address (so->lm_info->lm + lmo->l_addr_offset,
+ builtin_type_void_data_ptr);
+ }
+ else
+ return so->lm_info->l_addr;
}
static CORE_ADDR
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [patch] nto target: fix null pointer dereference
2008-08-13 15:50 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
@ 2008-08-14 20:46 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Aleksandar Ristovski @ 2008-08-14 20:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 153 bytes --]
Ulrich Weigand wrote:
>
> ... you might want to cache the address you've computed once
Changed accordingly, new patch attached.
Thanks,
Aleksandar
[-- Attachment #2: nto-tdep.c.200808141635.diff.ChangeLog --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 208 bytes --]
2008-08-14 Aleksandar Ristovski <aristovski@qnx.com>
* nto-tdep.c (lm_info): Updated struct lm_info definition from
solib-svr4.c
(LM_ADDR): Use l_addr if available; if not, use link map and set l_addr.
[-- Attachment #3: nto-tdep.c.200808141635.diff --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1979 bytes --]
Index: gdb/nto-tdep.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/nto-tdep.c,v
retrieving revision 1.25
diff -u -p -r1.25 nto-tdep.c
--- gdb/nto-tdep.c 23 Jul 2008 13:36:00 -0000 1.25
+++ gdb/nto-tdep.c 14 Aug 2008 20:37:20 -0000
@@ -253,21 +253,39 @@ nto_parse_redirection (char *pargv[], co
solib-svr4.c to support nto_relocate_section_addresses
which is different from the svr4 version. */
+/* Link map info to include in an allocated so_list entry */
+
struct lm_info
-{
- /* Pointer to copy of link map from inferior. The type is char *
- rather than void *, so that we may use byte offsets to find the
- various fields without the need for a cast. */
- char *lm;
-};
+ {
+ /* Pointer to copy of link map from inferior. The type is char *
+ rather than void *, so that we may use byte offsets to find the
+ various fields without the need for a cast. */
+ gdb_byte *lm;
+
+ /* Amount by which addresses in the binary should be relocated to
+ match the inferior. This could most often be taken directly
+ from lm, but when prelinking is involved and the prelink base
+ address changes, we may need a different offset, we want to
+ warn about the difference and compute it only once. */
+ CORE_ADDR l_addr;
+
+ /* The target location of lm. */
+ CORE_ADDR lm_addr;
+ };
+
static CORE_ADDR
LM_ADDR (struct so_list *so)
{
- struct link_map_offsets *lmo = nto_fetch_link_map_offsets ();
+ if (so->lm_info->l_addr == (CORE_ADDR)-1)
+ {
+ struct link_map_offsets *lmo = nto_fetch_link_map_offsets ();
- return extract_typed_address (so->lm_info->lm + lmo->l_addr_offset,
- builtin_type_void_data_ptr);
+ so->lm_info->l_addr =
+ extract_typed_address (so->lm_info->lm + lmo->l_addr_offset,
+ builtin_type_void_data_ptr);
+ }
+ return so->lm_info->l_addr;
}
static CORE_ADDR
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [patch] nto target: fix null pointer dereference
@ 2008-08-12 16:38 Aleksandar Ristovski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Aleksandar Ristovski @ 2008-08-12 16:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches; +Cc: Ulrich Weigand
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 159 bytes --]
Hello,
Simple patch to fix null pointer dereference. This should make qnx target operational and usable.
Thanks,
Aleksandar Ristovski
QNX Software Systems
[-- Attachment #2: nto-tdep.c-20080812.diff.ChangeLog --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 136 bytes --]
2008-08-12 Aleksandar Ristovski <aristovski@qnx.com>
* nto-tdep.c (LM_ADDR): Make sure the address is valid before
dereferencing.
[-- Attachment #3: nto-tdep.c-20080812.diff --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 580 bytes --]
Index: gdb/nto-tdep.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/nto-tdep.c,v
retrieving revision 1.25
diff -u -p -r1.25 nto-tdep.c
--- gdb/nto-tdep.c 23 Jul 2008 13:36:00 -0000 1.25
+++ gdb/nto-tdep.c 12 Aug 2008 16:33:18 -0000
@@ -266,6 +266,8 @@ LM_ADDR (struct so_list *so)
{
struct link_map_offsets *lmo = nto_fetch_link_map_offsets ();
+ if (so->lm_info->lm == NULL)
+ return 0;
return extract_typed_address (so->lm_info->lm + lmo->l_addr_offset,
builtin_type_void_data_ptr);
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-08-14 20:51 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-08-12 18:33 [patch] nto target: fix null pointer dereference Ulrich Weigand
2008-08-12 21:26 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
2008-08-12 21:32 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-08-13 15:47 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-08-14 20:51 Ulrich Weigand
2008-08-13 13:30 Ulrich Weigand
2008-08-13 15:50 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
2008-08-14 20:46 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
2008-08-12 16:38 Aleksandar Ristovski
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox