[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180205162403.GV1627@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2018 11:24:03 -0500
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] track pthread stack guard sizes
On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 07:18:44PM +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Feb 2018, William Pitcock wrote:
> > --- a/src/internal/pthread_impl.h
> > +++ b/src/internal/pthread_impl.h
> > @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ struct pthread {
> > char *dlerror_buf;
> > int dlerror_flag;
> > void *stdio_locks;
> > + size_t guard_size;
> > uintptr_t canary_at_end;
> > void **dtv_copy;
> > };
>
> Doesn't this break SSP on powerpc and powerpc64 by changing offset of
> 'canary_at_end'? If not, can you please mention why in the commit message?
The "_at_end" means it's at a fixed negative offset from the end of
the structure. I already have this patch pending push in my tree, but
I can add a separate commit commenting the ABI-mandated layout of the
structure.
Rich
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.
