This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Potential issue with strstr on x86 with sse4.2 in glibc-2.18
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Rich Felker <dalias at aerifal dot cx>
- Cc: Allan McRae <allan at archlinux dot org>, Alexander Monakov <amonakov at ispras dot ru>, <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 15:56:46 +0000
- Subject: Re: Potential issue with strstr on x86 with sse4.2 in glibc-2.18
- References: <520E181D dot 2040308 at archlinux dot org> <alpine dot LNX dot 2 dot 00 dot 1308191628370 dot 2626 at monopod dot intra dot ispras dot ru> <20130819144648 dot GF20515 at brightrain dot aerifal dot cx> <alpine dot LNX dot 2 dot 00 dot 1308191924490 dot 2626 at monopod dot intra dot ispras dot ru> <5212A278 dot 3090909 at archlinux dot org> <20130819230644 dot GM20515 at brightrain dot aerifal dot cx> <5212E278 dot 4030703 at archlinux dot org> <20130820033430 dot GN20515 at brightrain dot aerifal dot cx> <20130820043956 dot GO20515 at brightrain dot aerifal dot cx>
On Tue, 20 Aug 2013, Rich Felker wrote:
> This all looks like a big mess, and it's all GCC's fault. With such a
> nasty incompatible ABI change, they should have added a minimally
> invasive way to build code that interoperates: not assuming the stack
> pointer is aligned on entry, but preserving the alignment on calls
> (i.e. keeping it the same mod 16 as it was on entry) so that both of
> these cases work:
> 1. Caller is using old 4-byte alignment.
> 2. Caller is using 16-byte alignment and needs its callbacks to be
> called with 16-byte alignment.
The old 4-byte alignment case should only apply to very old binaries, but
of course an old binary using strstr still ought to work on a new system.
That is, the intent of the glibc ABI is to support such binaries, and this
worked as long as x86 didn't use SSE in glibc. In turn, that means that
any entry point to glibc functions using SSE in a way that requires
16-byte alignment needs to do dynamic stack realignment.
Given that since 2011 we don't try to build x86 glibc with
-mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 for most functions to save stack space, I
think the x86 glibc should already be preserving alignment as you request
(and the $(uses-callbacks) incompleteness may not matter in practice for
this issue) - the problem is for old binaries, maybe linked with glibc
2.0, doing things that were valid at the time with interfaces that existed
at the time, although at least since 2006 it's not been considered valid
to build something with the 4-byte alignment and expect to be able to call
standard interfaces with that alignment (so maybe the realignment is only
needed when the user's entry point to glibc is at a 2.4 or older symbol
version, although I don't know if it's worth adding any new-version entry
points that bypass the realignment).
(In the case of strstr, bug 12100 for asymptotic slowness of the SSE4.2
implementation is also still open - though the preference was to use a
hybrid approach for a fix rather than completely removing the SSE4.2
version, so I suppose the realignment issue will remain even with a fix
for that bug.)
Joseph S. Myers