Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2023 13:20:15 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 269568] strip(1) creates an executable which crashes in ld-elf.so.1 Message-ID: <bug-269568-227-nJzloycjad@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-269568-227@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=269568 Fernando Apesteguía <fernape@FreeBSD.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|New |Open Version|13.1-RELEASE |CURRENT CC| |fernape@FreeBSD.org --- Comment #1 from Fernando Apesteguía <fernape@FreeBSD.org> --- The program fails in this line memset(&objtmp, 0, sizeof(objtmp)); in static void init_rtld(caddr_t mapbase, Elf_Auxinfo **aux_info) in rtld.c objtmp is already zeroed and its address is (gdb) p &objtmp $9 = (Obj_Entry *) 0x7fffffffe150 which is not addressable. After creating the jdupes executable with LOW_MEMORY=1, we can inspect the ELF of the original file and the files stripped with strip(1) in base (fails), gnu strip and llvm-strip (both work). Having a look at the headers, The relocation information for the versions that work is this: GNU_RELRO 0x0000000000007400 0x0000000000209400 0x0000000000209400 0x00000000000001a0 0x0000000000000c00 R 0x1 which is different from the header generated by strip(1): GNU_RELRO 0x0000000000007400 0x0000000000209400 0x0000000000209400 0x00000000000001a0 0x00000000000001a0 R 0x1 Notice how MemSiz is smaller in the latter case (1a0 vs c00). There is another difference that I can spot. In the three versions that work, this is the GNU_STACK header: GNU_STACK 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000001000000 RW 0 But strip(1) generates this: GNU_STACK 0x0000000000000000 0x000000000020a770 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000002308 RW 0 Again, the MemSiz is much smaller in this case. However, the .bss section in all four executables is identical: [25] .bss NOBITS 000000000020a770 00007768 0000000000002308 0000000000000000 WA 0 0 16 Changing Version to CURRENT since it fails there too. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-269568-227-nJzloycjad>