Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2018 09:15:23 +0200 From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix TLS layout of TLS variant I when there is a gap above TP * Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> [2018-06-01 22:59:11 -0400]: > On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 01:52:01AM +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > > In TLS variant I the TLS is above TP (or above a fixed offset from TP) > > but on some targets there is a reserved gap above TP before TLS starts. > > > > This matters for the local-exec tls access model when the offsets of > > TLS variables from the TP are hard coded by the linker into the > > executable, so the libc must compute these offsets the same way as the > > linker. The tls offset of the main module has to be > > > > alignup(GAP_ABOVE_TP, main_tls_align). > > > > If there is no TLS in the main module then the gap can be ignored > > since musl does not use it and the tls access models of shared > > libraries are not affected. > > > > The previous setup only worked if (tls_align & -GAP_ABOVE_TP) == 0 > > (i.e. TLS did not require large alignment) because the gap was > > treated as a fixed offset from TP. Now the TP points at the end > > of the pthread struct (which is aligned) and there is a gap above > > it (which may also need alignment). > > > > The fix required changing TP_ADJ and __pthread_self on affected > > targets (aarch64, arm and sh) and in the tlsdesc asm the offset to > > access the dtv changed too. > > --- > > On first glance it all looks right. I'll read in more detail soon. > Thanks! > > > passed my simple local-exec tests. > > Did you test all archs or just some? I think we should at least run > libc-test (if it sufficiently tests TLS) on the affected archs to make > sure there are no regressions. > ran libc-test on various targets via qemu-user, i didnt see any regressions.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.