Re: [lttng-dev] New TLS usage in libgcc_s.so.1, compatibility impact

2024-01-15 Thread Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
On 2024-01-15 14:42, Florian Weimer wrote: * Mathieu Desnoyers: [...] General use of lttng should be fine, I think, only the malloc wrapper has this problem. The purpose of the nesting counter TLS variable in the malloc wrapper is to catch situations like this where a global-dynamic TLS

Re: [lttng-dev] New TLS usage in libgcc_s.so.1, compatibility impact

2024-01-15 Thread Florian Weimer via lttng-dev
* Mathieu Desnoyers: > On 2024-01-13 07:49, Florian Weimer via lttng-dev wrote: >> This commit >> commit 8abddb187b33480d8827f44ec655f45734a1749d >> Author: Andrew Burgess >> Date: Sat Aug 5 14:31:06 2023 +0200 >> libgcc: support heap-based trampolines >> Add support for

Re: [lttng-dev] New TLS usage in libgcc_s.so.1, compatibility impact

2024-01-15 Thread Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
On 2024-01-13 07:49, Florian Weimer via lttng-dev wrote: This commit commit 8abddb187b33480d8827f44ec655f45734a1749d Author: Andrew Burgess Date: Sat Aug 5 14:31:06 2023 +0200 libgcc: support heap-based trampolines Add support for heap-based trampolines on x86_64-linux,

Re: [lttng-dev] New TLS usage in libgcc_s.so.1, compatibility impact

2024-01-15 Thread Florian Weimer via lttng-dev
* Iain Sandoe: >> On 15 Jan 2024, at 15:35, Florian Weimer wrote: >> >> * Carlos O'Donell: >> >>> I agree. TLS should be seen more like .bss/.data rather than something >>> that is allocated with malloc(). >> >> There wasn't consensus regarding this in 2014. See below. >> >>> If we leak

Re: [lttng-dev] New TLS usage in libgcc_s.so.1, compatibility impact

2024-01-15 Thread Joseph Myers via lttng-dev
On Mon, 15 Jan 2024, Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote: > The change conflated multiple issues: sanitizer support, > async-signal-safe TLS access, and eager allocation of all TLS-related > memory, so that subsequent accesses cannot fail. My impression was the > main point of contention was eager

Re: [lttng-dev] New TLS usage in libgcc_s.so.1, compatibility impact

2024-01-15 Thread Iain Sandoe via lttng-dev
> On 15 Jan 2024, at 15:35, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Carlos O'Donell: > >> I agree. TLS should be seen more like .bss/.data rather than something >> that is allocated with malloc(). > > There wasn't consensus regarding this in 2014. See below. > >> If we leak memory via TLS that is a

Re: [lttng-dev] New TLS usage in libgcc_s.so.1, compatibility impact

2024-01-15 Thread Szabolcs Nagy via lttng-dev
The 01/13/2024 13:49, Florian Weimer wrote: > This commit > > commit 8abddb187b33480d8827f44ec655f45734a1749d > Author: Andrew Burgess > Date: Sat Aug 5 14:31:06 2023 +0200 > > libgcc: support heap-based trampolines > > Add support for heap-based trampolines on x86_64-linux,

Re: [lttng-dev] New TLS usage in libgcc_s.so.1, compatibility impact

2024-01-15 Thread Florian Weimer via lttng-dev
* Carlos O'Donell: > I agree. TLS should be seen more like .bss/.data rather than something > that is allocated with malloc(). There wasn't consensus regarding this in 2014. See below. > If we leak memory via TLS that is a glibc bug that we can deal with, This is something that libgcc_s.so.1

Re: [lttng-dev] New TLS usage in libgcc_s.so.1, compatibility impact

2024-01-15 Thread Carlos O'Donell via lttng-dev
On 1/15/24 08:55, Adhemerval Zanella Netto wrote: > > > On 15/01/24 09:46, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: >> The 01/13/2024 13:49, Florian Weimer wrote: >>> This commit >>> >>> commit 8abddb187b33480d8827f44ec655f45734a1749d >>> Author: Andrew Burgess >>> Date: Sat Aug 5 14:31:06 2023 +0200 >>> >>>

Re: [lttng-dev] New TLS usage in libgcc_s.so.1, compatibility impact

2024-01-15 Thread Adhemerval Zanella Netto via lttng-dev
On 15/01/24 09:46, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > The 01/13/2024 13:49, Florian Weimer wrote: >> This commit >> >> commit 8abddb187b33480d8827f44ec655f45734a1749d >> Author: Andrew Burgess >> Date: Sat Aug 5 14:31:06 2023 +0200 >> >> libgcc: support heap-based trampolines >> >> Add