mailing list of musl libc
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>
To: Christopher Hodgkins <George.Hodgkins@colorado.edu>
Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [musl] Failing assertions in get_meta
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 19:40:28 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210720234026.GL13220@brightrain.aerifal.cx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGd_VJy7DCcG+RN-yAeZzNcChZ7AJnjKNLm+AXT-wNT56=21Yw@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 01:19:58PM -0600, Christopher Hodgkins wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm working on a modified version of musl for some research.
> We replaced the typical memory provisioning methods (mmap/brk)
> with our own versions which change the backing of the provided memory,
> but maintain the same semantics from the perspective of the caller,
> except that the program break is no longer adjacent to the rest of the
> mapped binary.
> 
> We have been encountering various failed assertions in mallocng during
> debugging
> in the get_meta function. Specifically, we see the assertion at line 141 in
> meta.h (meta == mem->base)
> failing when free()-ing memory previously allocated with malloc(),

If this assertion fails, it means that the group header's pointer to
the out-of-band metadata is either pointing to the wrong place (e.g.
because it was overwritten by some out-of-bounds access to allocated
memory) or points to the correct metadata location but the structure
at the location has been overwritten.

> and the assertion at line 131 ( !((uintptr_t)p & 15) ) failing for calls to
> posix_memalign
> with an alignment of 16 and a length of 704. Could our changes in the
> backing of provisioned memory cause this?

Perhaps, if you're not following the semantics of mmap (that it yield
page-aligned, page-granular memory) or not honoring the obligation to
faithfully store data written to the memory. Without knowing the
specifics of your modification it's hard to say.

> Related question: We are aware of (and have disabled) the "donation"
> functionality in the loader.
> Are there other out-of-band (i.e. not mmap/sbrk) sources of memory used by
> mallocng?

No.

> The errors are caused in some way by our changes, but we haven't changed
> anything inside the allocator,
> except to point the brk() macro to our own implementation rather than the
> syscall.

You could try disabling brk entirely by making it never return a value
equal to its argument, as in:

#define brk(p) ((p)-1)

This would help determine if your problem is caused by your brk or
something else.

Rich

      reply	other threads:[~2021-07-20 23:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-07-20 19:19 Christopher Hodgkins
2021-07-20 23:40 ` Rich Felker [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20210720234026.GL13220@brightrain.aerifal.cx \
    --to=dalias@libc.org \
    --cc=George.Hodgkins@colorado.edu \
    --cc=musl@lists.openwall.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/musl/

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).