Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2020 20:27:31 -0800 From: Ryan Libby <rlibby@freebsd.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, svn-src-head <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>, Konstantin Belousov <kib@freebsd.org>, Alex Richardson <arichardson@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r368789 - head/libexec/rtld-elf/rtld-libc Message-ID: <CAHgpiFz2ir10rbHWWF=oX%2BPkT%2Bb7nV99Wwzfj03oj6VkLV-5rg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <47e9db0f-14b4-0a0d-45c4-7e466e69711f@FreeBSD.org> References: <202012190838.0BJ8cVJ3064816@repo.freebsd.org> <47e9db0f-14b4-0a0d-45c4-7e466e69711f@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 7:23 PM John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: > > On 12/19/20 12:38 AM, Ryan Libby wrote: > > Author: rlibby > > Date: Sat Dec 19 08:38:31 2020 > > New Revision: 368789 > > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/368789 > > > > Log: > > rtld-elf: link udivmoddi4 from compiler_rt > > > > This fixes the gcc9 build of rtld-elf32 on amd64, which needed an > > implementation of udivmoddi4. > > > > rtld-elf uses certain functions normally found in libc, and so it > > includes certain files from libc in its own build. It has two > > mechanisms to include files from libc: one that rebuilds source files in > > the rtld-elf environment, and one that extracts object files from a > > purpose-built no-SSP PIC archive. > > > > In addition to libc functions, rtld-elf may need to link functions > > normally found in libcompiler_rt (formerly libgcc). Now, add an ability > > to rebuild libcompiler_rt source files in the rtld-elf environment. We > > don't yet have a need for an object file extraction mechanism. > > > > libcompiler_rt could also supply udivdi3 and umoddi3, but leave them > > alone for now. > > > > Reviewed by: arichardson, kib > > Sponsored by: Dell EMC Isilon > > Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D27665 > > Hmm, I had just linked against libcompiler_rt directly as we do on arm: > > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D26199 > > It was stuck waiting for review feedback. > > Given libcompiler_rt is a static archive, we could probably safely link > against it directly unlike libc where we have to pick specific object > files. > > -- > John Baldwin Sorry, I wasn't aware of your review. Do you want this backed out? I did see the arm path. I think it is not quite right, because libcompiler_rt is compiled with -fstack-protector-strong, which is not compatible with rtld. However, it will work in practice if stack protection doesn't actually get used on any linked function. We could build a special libcompiler_rt with no stack protection like we do just for rtld with libc, but since we'd only want this no-SSP library for rtld, that's not much different from just rebuilding its source files in rtld. In addition, by rebuilding specific files we avoid overlinking--although that may not be a big deal (?), and there may be other cleaner ways to avoid that (?). On a tangent, it might be neat to split out an rtld_bootstrap (everything through init_rtld()) so that only the bootstrap code needs to be compiled and linked with no-SSP. I looked at this some but I figured there might not be appetite for a bunch of reorganization of rtld just to enable SSP. Anyway the bootstrap code would still need these particular libcompiler_rt functions to be no-SSP, as they get used in the printf procedure, which I am guessing the bootstrap may need. Ryan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAHgpiFz2ir10rbHWWF=oX%2BPkT%2Bb7nV99Wwzfj03oj6VkLV-5rg>