[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs? |
Date: |
Tue, 09 May 2017 18:18:08 +0300 |
> From: Jim Meyering <address@hidden>
> Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 22:48:06 -0700
> Cc: Paul Eggert <address@hidden>, emacs-devel <address@hidden>
>
> echo foo |gpg -c > foo.gpg
> src/temacs -q foo.gpg 2> err
>
> which reported this stack buffer overrun:
>
> ==24522==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow on address
> 0x7ffd5cc4d928 at pc 0x00000073fd76 bp 0x7ffd5cc4d910 sp
> 0x7ffd5cc4d908
> READ of size 8 at 0x7ffd5cc4d928 thread T0
> #0 0x73fd75 in PSEUDOVECTORP /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/lisp.h:1454
> #1 0x7438c9 in BUFFERP /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/buffer.h:887
> #2 0x9c64b6 in call_process /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/callproc.c:702
> #3 0x9c41db in Fcall_process /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/callproc.c:270
> #4 0x8e3122 in funcall_subr /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2799
> #5 0x8e2aa1 in Ffuncall /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2744
> #6 0x8e072d in Fapply /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2375
> #7 0x8e3122 in funcall_subr /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2799
> #8 0x8e2aa1 in Ffuncall /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2744
> #9 0x98c89b in exec_byte_code /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/bytecode.c:641
> #10 0x8e4b55 in funcall_lambda /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:3022
> #11 0x8e2ae1 in Ffuncall /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2746
> #12 0x98c89b in exec_byte_code /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/bytecode.c:641
> #13 0x8e4b55 in funcall_lambda /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:3022
> #14 0x8e2ae1 in Ffuncall /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2746
> #15 0x98c89b in exec_byte_code /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/bytecode.c:641
> #16 0x8e4604 in funcall_lambda /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2944
> #17 0x8e2ae1 in Ffuncall /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2746
> #18 0x98c89b in exec_byte_code /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/bytecode.c:641
> #19 0x8e4604 in funcall_lambda /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2944
> #20 0x8e2ae1 in Ffuncall /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2746
> #21 0x98c89b in exec_byte_code /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/bytecode.c:641
> #22 0x8e4604 in funcall_lambda /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2944
> #23 0x8e2ae1 in Ffuncall /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2746
> #24 0x8e072d in Fapply /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2375
> #25 0x8e3122 in funcall_subr /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2799
> #26 0x8e2aa1 in Ffuncall /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2744
> #27 0x98c89b in exec_byte_code /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/bytecode.c:641
> #28 0x8e4604 in funcall_lambda /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2944
> #29 0x8e2ae1 in Ffuncall /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2746
> #30 0x8e1f8d in call6 /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2649
> #31 0x8034eb in Finsert_file_contents /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/fileio.c:3602
> #32 0x8e367f in funcall_subr /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2831
> #33 0x8e2aa1 in Ffuncall /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2744
> #34 0x98c89b in exec_byte_code /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/bytecode.c:641
> #35 0x8e4604 in funcall_lambda /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2944
> #36 0x8e2ae1 in Ffuncall /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2746
> #37 0x98c89b in exec_byte_code /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/bytecode.c:641
> #38 0x8e4604 in funcall_lambda /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2944
> #39 0x8e2ae1 in Ffuncall /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2746
> #40 0x98c89b in exec_byte_code /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/bytecode.c:641
> #41 0x8e4604 in funcall_lambda /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2944
> #42 0x8e2ae1 in Ffuncall /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2746
> #43 0x98c89b in exec_byte_code /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/bytecode.c:641
> #44 0x8e4604 in funcall_lambda /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2944
> #45 0x8e2ae1 in Ffuncall /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2746
> #46 0x98c89b in exec_byte_code /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/bytecode.c:641
> #47 0x8e4604 in funcall_lambda /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2944
> #48 0x8e2ae1 in Ffuncall /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2746
> #49 0x98c89b in exec_byte_code /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/bytecode.c:641
> #50 0x8e4604 in funcall_lambda /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2944
> #51 0x8e3f96 in apply_lambda /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2881
> #52 0x8df8ab in eval_sub /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2265
> #53 0x8dda2c in Feval /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2042
> #54 0x8df175 in eval_sub /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2223
> #55 0x945574 in readevalloop /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/lread.c:1947
> #56 0x9425f5 in Fload /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/lread.c:1352
> #57 0x8df41e in eval_sub /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2234
> #58 0x8dda2c in Feval /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:2042
> #59 0x751a34 in top_level_2 /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/keyboard.c:1121
> #60 0x8d9c05 in internal_condition_case /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:1326
> #61 0x751a97 in top_level_1 /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/keyboard.c:1129
> #62 0x8d83e9 in internal_catch /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/eval.c:1091
> #63 0x751899 in command_loop /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/keyboard.c:1090
> #64 0x75033f in recursive_edit_1 /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/keyboard.c:697
> #65 0x7506dd in Frecursive_edit /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/keyboard.c:768
> #66 0x74bbb9 in main /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/emacs.c:1687
> #67 0x7f40c7732400 in __libc_start_main (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x20400)
> #68 0x40d369 in _start (/home/j/w/co/emacs/src/temacs+0x40d369)
>
> Address 0x7ffd5cc4d928 is located in stack of thread T0 at offset 136 in frame
> #0 0x9c8c15 in child_setup /home/j/w/co/emacs/src/callproc.c:1179
>
> This frame has 2 object(s):
> [32, 40) 'display'
> [96, 104) 'tmp' <== Memory access at offset 136 overflows this variable
> HINT: this may be a false positive if your program uses some custom
> stack unwind mechanism or swapcontext
I admit that I don't understand this report. At the point where the
report claims there was buffer overflow, child_setup is not in the
call stack, because it is/was called in another process after vfork:
the callstack shows the stack of the Emacs process, whereas
child_setup is called by a child process. So either the report shows
a stack of a wrong process, or something else is going on. Or maybe I
simply don't understand how to read this report.
- building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Jim Meyering, 2017/05/06
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Paul Eggert, 2017/05/07
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Jim Meyering, 2017/05/07
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/05/07
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Paul Eggert, 2017/05/08
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/05/08
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Paul Eggert, 2017/05/08
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/05/08
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Jim Meyering, 2017/05/09
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Jim Meyering, 2017/05/09
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/05/09
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Paul Eggert, 2017/05/09
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Jim Meyering, 2017/05/09
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/05/09
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Paul Eggert, 2017/05/16
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/05/16
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Paul Eggert, 2017/05/17
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/05/17
- Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs?, Paul Eggert, 2017/05/17