glibc 2.25 seems to have broken AddressSaniitzer Inbox x glibc x sanitizer x

[Adhemerval Zanella]

On 27/02/2018 07:53, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> On 27/02/18 08:21, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> On 02/22/2018 01:56 PM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
>>>> Split stack support already requires a stack limit in the TCB.  This could be reused even if split stacks are not used.  We'd need to add another field for the other stack end, though.
>>> Couldn't we embedded it on pthread_t instead? I rather avoid changing TCB, since it
>>> requires changing the ABI for some architectures (aarch64 is an example where
>>> split-stack field is being added in a different manner).
>>
>> It will be part of the ABI no matter where we put it.  I don't have a strong preference in this regard.
>>
> 
> i think the point is that you can add
> 
> - a new function to query it
> - or put it at a fixed offset from the tp.
> 
> the later is a much uglier abi than a new symbol
> (it requires different hack on all targets and
> there is no documentation or any way to figure
> out the offsets other than reading glibc code,
> and much less likely that other libcs would add it)

Since it is not a performance critical one, I would recommend the former as well.