Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1373864 > unrolled thread

Re: x32 processes, with CONFIG_X86_X32 not set

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: x32 processes, with CONFIG_X86_X32 not set Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> - 2016-04-08 02:30 +0200
    Re: x32 processes, with CONFIG_X86_X32 not set Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk> - 2016-04-08 03:40 +0200

#1373864 — Re: x32 processes, with CONFIG_X86_X32 not set

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 8:58 AM, Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 08:51:39AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>  > On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk> wrote:
>  > > I had a trinity process get stuck last overnight.
>  > > The reason for it getting stuck is my bug (I think), but
>  > > there's an odd unrelated thing I noticed while debugging this..
>  > >
>  > > $ strace -p 20966
>  > > strace: Process 20966 attached
>  > > strace: [ Process PID=20966 runs in x32 mode. ]
>  > >
>  > > So I don't use that new-fangled x32 stuff.
>  > > I don't even have CONFIG_X86_X32 compiled in.
>  > >
>  > > Is this strace getting confused, or did we somehow screw
>  > > up the syscall entry code ?
>  > >
>  > >         Dave
>  > >
>  >
>  > I think you're just seeing an oddity of how x32 works.  Unlike
>  > "compat", x32-ness of the current syscall isn't a special magic state
>  > variable; it's just but 31 in the syscall nr.  So trying to do an x32
>  > syscall on a non-x32 syscall should still show bit 31 set to ptracers,
>  > and the strace probably decodes this as being in x32 mode.
>
> But this is an x86-64 binary, and it's the main process, not one of the fuzzing
> child processes. It shouldn't be even trying to do anything weird.
> It creates a bunch of fd's, then enters a loop forking/reaping children.
> (In this case it actually hung while creating the fd's)
>
> Trinity doesn't actually have any knowledge of x32 at all, mostly because
> it's been irrelevant to me (and most other people).
>

Hmm.  Do you have the next couple lines of strace output by any
chance?  I'm wondering if this is a classic bug/misfeature/confusion
in the way that orig_ax works.

FWIW, the way that strace detects 32-bit mode is bogus, and I don't
actually know how strace detects x32 mode.

>         Dave
>
>



-- 
Andy Lutomirski
AMA Capital Management, LLC

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1373929

On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 05:20:50PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
 > >  > > I had a trinity process get stuck last overnight.
 > >  > > The reason for it getting stuck is my bug (I think), but
 > >  > > there's an odd unrelated thing I noticed while debugging this..
 > >  > >
 > >  > > $ strace -p 20966
 > >  > > strace: Process 20966 attached
 > >  > > strace: [ Process PID=20966 runs in x32 mode. ]
 > >  > >
 > >  > > So I don't use that new-fangled x32 stuff.
 > >  > > I don't even have CONFIG_X86_X32 compiled in.
 > >  > >
 > >  > > Is this strace getting confused, or did we somehow screw
 > >  > > up the syscall entry code ?
 > >  > >
 > >  > >         Dave
 > >  > >
 > >  >
 > >  > I think you're just seeing an oddity of how x32 works.  Unlike
 > >  > "compat", x32-ness of the current syscall isn't a special magic state
 > >  > variable; it's just but 31 in the syscall nr.  So trying to do an x32
 > >  > syscall on a non-x32 syscall should still show bit 31 set to ptracers,
 > >  > and the strace probably decodes this as being in x32 mode.
 > >
 > > But this is an x86-64 binary, and it's the main process, not one of the fuzzing
 > > child processes. It shouldn't be even trying to do anything weird.
 > > It creates a bunch of fd's, then enters a loop forking/reaping children.
 > > (In this case it actually hung while creating the fd's)
 > >
 > > Trinity doesn't actually have any knowledge of x32 at all, mostly because
 > > it's been irrelevant to me (and most other people).
 > >
 > 
 > Hmm.  Do you have the next couple lines of strace output by any
 > chance?  I'm wondering if this is a classic bug/misfeature/confusion
 > in the way that orig_ax works.

I don't. That box got rebooted a couple dozen times since then.
FWIW, I've not seen this happen since. Very strange.

	Dave

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web