Hi again I want to modify the plugins.int files to add some internal plugins to the different pharo distributions (http://forum.world.st/Missing-plugins-to-make-the-vmProfiler-work-on-Pharo-td4946444.html).Is there an already existing script that I could use for this matter ? |
> On 10-05-2017, at 10:47 AM, Sophie Kaleba <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Hi again > > I want to modify the plugins.int files to add some internal plugins to the different pharo distributions (http://forum.world.st/Missing-plugins-to-make-the-vmProfiler-work-on-Pharo-td4946444.html). It’s just a text file so you edit with your favourite text editing tools (smalltalk, obviously!) and add another line with the name of your plugin. If the plugin is already listed in the *other* plugins.* file then you’d want to remove it as well - ie to change FooPlugin from being built internal to external, delete it from plugins.int and add to plugins.ext You could very simply try this out by moving pretty much any current plugin from one list to another and running a build, just to convince yourself it works ok. You might also take a look though the assorted plugins.* files in the many `build.*/build*` directories to see a lot of examples. And indeed a lot of cases where a plugin appears to be near-randlomly included or not, something that could do with tidying up. And if you were to conclude that making things tidier and doing test builds was a project worth spending a little time on then you would certainly earn my thanks... tim -- tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim Fractured Idiom:- LE ROI EST MORT. JIVE LE ROI - The King is dead. No kidding. |
Hi Tim, I hadn't thought about that, thanks ! I will make sure not to create any duplicate of these plugins I knew indeed that I could edit all the plugins.*files by hand, that was the reason why I was looking for a script. Please forgive my laziness :-) Sophie 2017-05-10 20:02 GMT+02:00 tim Rowledge <[hidden email]>:
|
> On 10-05-2017, at 1:47 PM, Sophie Kaleba <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Hi Tim, > > I hadn't thought about that, thanks ! I will make sure not to create any duplicate of these plugins I’ve never thought to experiment and see what happens if one tried to make both internal and external versions of the same plugin. I’d guess that it might not cause any problems in most cases.. hmm, unless on some platform you actually have to compile with different flags, and then maybe there’d be problems if the internal version were compiled with flag A, the ‘.o’ file were left around, the external version compile process found it, therefore didn’t compile with flag B, thus making something fail? > > I knew indeed that I could edit all the plugins.*files by hand, that was the reason why I was looking for a script. Please forgive my laziness :-) Creatively applied laziness is an admirable thing. It’s what makes us write software and make tools so we can do more with less effort. tim -- tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim Always try to be modest. And be damn proud of it! |
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 02:36:20PM -0700, tim Rowledge wrote: > > > > On 10-05-2017, at 1:47 PM, Sophie Kaleba <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > Hi Tim, > > > > I hadn't thought about that, thanks ! I will make sure not to create any duplicate of these plugins > > I???ve never thought to experiment and see what happens if one tried to make both internal and external versions of the same plugin. I???d guess that it might not cause any problems in most cases.. hmm, unless on some platform you actually have to compile with different flags, and then maybe there???d be problems if the internal version were compiled with flag A, the ???.o??? file were left around, the external version compile process found it, therefore didn???t compile with flag B, thus making something fail? > I have not checked in a while, but I am pretty sure that it is perfectly ok to have both an internally compiled plugin as part of the main VM executable, and also an externally compiled version of the same plugin (a loadable module in a file separate from the main VM executable). In that case, the external plugin should override the internal one. The idea is that it should be easy to make an external plugin that might add some new behaviour, and the plugin developer should be able to do this without waiting for somebody else to distribute a new VM. If this is not the case, then it certainly /should/ be. Tim, weren't you one of the people who invented this loadable module stuff in the first place? Dave |
> On 10-05-2017, at 4:57 PM, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 02:36:20PM -0700, tim Rowledge wrote: >> >> >>> On 10-05-2017, at 1:47 PM, Sophie Kaleba <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Tim, >>> >>> I hadn't thought about that, thanks ! I will make sure not to create any duplicate of these plugins >> >> I???ve never thought to experiment and see what happens if one tried to make both internal and external versions of the same plugin. I???d guess that it might not cause any problems in most cases.. hmm, unless on some platform you actually have to compile with different flags, and then maybe there???d be problems if the internal version were compiled with flag A, the ???.o??? file were left around, the external version compile process found it, therefore didn???t compile with flag B, thus making something fail? >> > > I have not checked in a while, but I am pretty sure that it is perfectly > ok to have both an internally compiled plugin as part of the main VM > executable, and also an externally compiled version of the same plugin > (a loadable module in a file separate from the main VM executable). In > that case, the external plugin should override the internal one. > > The idea is that it should be easy to make an external plugin that might > add some new behaviour, and the plugin developer should be able to do > this without waiting for somebody else to distribute a new VM. > > If this is not the case, then it certainly /should/ be. Tim, weren't > you one of the people who invented this loadable module stuff in the > first place? D’oh, of course you’re right. Oh the joys of aging… And what I *should* have said was that I haven’t experimented with making internal and external versions within the same build process, given faint concerns about the object files maybe confusing the matter if one version is built and (incorrect) object files are left for the next version make-rule to find. So er, something like build BlobbyPlugin.c -> BlobbyPlugin.o -> link to make vm with internal BlobbyPlugin followed almost immediately by build BlobbyPlugin.c -> ooh, already got BlobbyPlugin.o -> make library BlobbyPlugin.la I’m imagining a situation where BlobbyPlugin.o actually ought to have been (re)compiled with subtly different flags in order to make a correct library. I may be being paranoid. Or maybe the OS is actually out to get me... tim -- tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim Useful random insult:- So dumb, he faxes face up. |
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 8:08 AM, tim Rowledge <[hidden email]> wrote: > > >> On 10-05-2017, at 4:57 PM, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> >> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 02:36:20PM -0700, tim Rowledge wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On 10-05-2017, at 1:47 PM, Sophie Kaleba <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Tim, >>>> >>>> I hadn't thought about that, thanks ! I will make sure not to create any duplicate of these plugins >>> >>> I???ve never thought to experiment and see what happens if one tried to make both internal and external versions of the same plugin. I???d guess that it might not cause any problems in most cases.. hmm, unless on some platform you actually have to compile with different flags, and then maybe there???d be problems if the internal version were compiled with flag A, the ???.o??? file were left around, the external version compile process found it, therefore didn???t compile with flag B, thus making something fail? >>> >> >> I have not checked in a while, but I am pretty sure that it is perfectly >> ok to have both an internally compiled plugin as part of the main VM >> executable, and also an externally compiled version of the same plugin >> (a loadable module in a file separate from the main VM executable). In >> that case, the external plugin should override the internal one. >> >> The idea is that it should be easy to make an external plugin that might >> add some new behaviour, and the plugin developer should be able to do >> this without waiting for somebody else to distribute a new VM. >> >> If this is not the case, then it certainly /should/ be. Tim, weren't >> you one of the people who invented this loadable module stuff in the >> first place? > > D’oh, of course you’re right. Oh the joys of aging… > > And what I *should* have said was that I haven’t experimented with making internal and external versions within the same build process, given faint concerns about the object files maybe confusing the matter if one version is built and (incorrect) object files are left for the next version make-rule to find. > So er, something like build BlobbyPlugin.c -> BlobbyPlugin.o -> link to make vm with internal BlobbyPlugin followed almost immediately by build BlobbyPlugin.c -> ooh, already got BlobbyPlugin.o -> make library BlobbyPlugin.la > I’m imagining a situation where BlobbyPlugin.o actually ought to have been (re)compiled with subtly different flags in order to make a correct library. I may be being paranoid. Or maybe the OS is actually out to get me... Remember, just because you think you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not watching you. HTH ;) cheers -ben |
Update : I did add the plugins to the file. That was the easy part, it went well.- at first, I had an error : "can't find PharoV50.sources". (I cloned the opensmalltalk-vm directory, ran updateSCCSVersions and then went in the "build.linux32x86/pharo.cog.spur/build.itimerheatbeat" and ran ./mvm -f ) Manually adding a "sources" directory containing the missing file solved the problem Did I miss something on that part? *** stack smashing detected ***: ./squeak terminated output file stack is full. I was told it could be caused by a near-full disk, but I still have 8Gb+ of free space so, well. Does somebody have any idea about what could cause this error ? It would actually help me narrowing down the possibilities... I am using ubuntu 15.10 (old) so I will update it later today and check if it solves the problem. I will also try to update some libs, just in case. In the meantime, i will make a PR with the modified plugins files anyway, and see if it gets rejected or not. Sophie 2017-05-11 3:18 GMT+02:00 Ben Coman <[hidden email]>:
|
Hi Sophie,
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Sophie Kaleba <[hidden email]> wrote:
I wonder if this is some checking feature supported by the C compiler you're using. I expect that it is either disabled or not available in the VMs built on binary. I say this because there is no occurrence of the string 'stack smashing detected' in our sources and so expect it is being produced by the C runtime on your version of linux. The stack organization in the VM is a little unusual. The VM reserves space for a set of "stack pages" upon which Smalltalk activations exist. The space for the stack pages is allocated via alloca on the C stack at startup. It could be that this strange organization, which means that at some times, when the VM is executing C, the stack pointer is at the bottom end of the C stack, but when it is executing JITted Smalltalk code the stack pointer is somewhere in the middle of the C stack. I expect that the C runtime sees this happening and misinterprets it as an error. I expect further that you can, and should, disable such checking. HTH
_,,,^..^,,,_ best, Eliot |
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 09:00:08PM -0700, Eliot Miranda wrote: > > Hi Sophie, > > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Sophie Kaleba <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > > > > Update : > > > > I did add the plugins to the file. That was the easy part, it went well. > > > > Then it got trickier when I tried to actually build the (Pharo) VM > > (build.linux32x86/pharo.cog.spur/build.itimerheatbeat) with my brand new > > plugins : > > > > - at first, I had an error : "can't find PharoV50.sources". > > > > (I cloned the opensmalltalk-vm directory, > > ran updateSCCSVersions > > and then went in the "build.linux32x86/pharo.cog.spur/build.itimerheatbeat" > > and ran ./mvm -f ) > > > > Manually adding a "sources" directory containing the missing file solved > > the problem > > Did I miss something on that part? > > > > > > -OK, now, the VM is built with this small hack. > > > > When I try to use the VMProfiler (which works fine using the latest squeak > > VM from bintray), I get a segmentation fault, with this message : > > > > *** stack smashing detected ***: ./squeak terminated > > output file stack is full. > > > > I wonder if this is some checking feature supported by the C compiler > you're using. I expect that it is either disabled or not available in the > VMs built on binary. I say this because there is no occurrence of the > string 'stack smashing detected' in our sources and so expect it is being > produced by the C runtime on your version of linux. > > The stack organization in the VM is a little unusual. The VM reserves > space for a set of "stack pages" upon which Smalltalk activations exist. > The space for the stack pages is allocated via alloca on the C stack at > startup. It could be that this strange organization, which means that at > some times, when the VM is executing C, the stack pointer is at the bottom > end of the C stack, but when it is executing JITted Smalltalk code the > stack pointer is somewhere in the middle of the C stack. I expect that the > C runtime sees this happening and misinterprets it as an error. > > I expect further that you can, and should, disable such checking. > It seems likely that this is a real stack overflow error. The "stack smashing detected" message comes from the C runtime. I googled it and found several good explanations. Here is a tip on how to partially disable the checking (although I do not think it will help much in this case); https://reverseengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/11777/how-to-effectively-bypass-gcc-stack-smashing-detection The other error message "output file stack is full" comes from the VM itself, in the pushOutputFile() function in platforms/Cross/vm/sqVirtualMachine.c. I cannot guess what might be the cause of this, but for purposes of debugging it might help to try building the VM without the new plugins. If the problem goes away, then it may indicate a problem in the plugins that are being added. Dave |
In reply to this post by Eliot Miranda-2
On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 12:00 PM, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Hi Sophie, > > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Sophie Kaleba <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> >> Update : >> >> I did add the plugins to the file. That was the easy part, it went well. >> >> Then it got trickier when I tried to actually build the (Pharo) VM (build.linux32x86/pharo.cog.spur/build.itimerheatbeat) with my brand new plugins : >> >> - at first, I had an error : "can't find PharoV50.sources". You're the fifth newcomer compiling the VM that I've seen bump into this problem. The fix PR has been available since last October... https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/79 >> >> (I cloned the opensmalltalk-vm directory, >> ran updateSCCSVersions >> and then went in the "build.linux32x86/pharo.cog.spur/build.itimerheatbeat" and ran ./mvm -f ) >> >> Manually adding a "sources" directory containing the missing file solved the problem >> Did I miss something on that part? >> >> >> -OK, now, the VM is built with this small hack. >> >> When I try to use the VMProfiler (which works fine using the latest squeak VM from bintray), I get a segmentation fault, with this message : >> >> *** stack smashing detected ***: ./squeak terminated >> output file stack is full. > > > I wonder if this is some checking feature supported by the C compiler you're using. I expect that it is either disabled or not available in the VMs built on binary. I say this because there is no occurrence of the string 'stack smashing detected' in our sources and so expect it is being produced by the C runtime on your version of linux. The best description I found in a quick search is... http://wiki.osdev.org/Stack_Smashing_Protector This implies a canary variable is being overwritten, which implies(??) a legitimate smashed-stack, with the culprit perhaps being some other protection mechanism like address space layout randomisation. Here is a detailed explanation including sample assembly code on the second page. http://www.drdobbs.com/security/anatomy-of-a-stack-smashing-attack-and-h/240001832 > > The stack organization in the VM is a little unusual. The VM reserves space for a set of "stack pages" upon which Smalltalk activations exist. The space for the stack pages is allocated via alloca on the C stack at startup. It could be that this strange organization, which means that at some times, when the VM is executing C, the stack pointer is at the bottom end of the C stack, but when it is executing JITted Smalltalk code the stack pointer is somewhere in the middle of the C stack. I expect that the C runtime sees this happening and misinterprets it as an error. @Eliot, could ASLR cause assumptions about this memory layout to be violated? It could be related to EBP register "position independent executables" http://forum.world.st/IMPORTANT-GCC-6-generates-position-independent-executables-by-default-on-Linux-td4935173.html This article mentions both Stack Smashing and EBP register but I can't exactly tie them together. https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~vsekar/Teaching/Fall16/18487-f16/reading/Makowski_2011_Smashing%20the%20Stack%20in%202011.pdf @Sophie, Could you report your OS and compiler version here? (sorry if you've already done this elsewhere) cheers -ben > > I expect further that you can, and should, disable such checking. > > HTH > > >> >> >> I already ran into this error when I first tried to run the VMProfiler a few weeks ago. At that time, I was using a built Squeak VM (still linux32x86 , cog.spur, itimer). >> Seeing that I got the same problem building both pharo and squeak vm (and not having it with vm I haven't actually built), I guess it has something to do with my environment. >> I was told it could be caused by a near-full disk, but I still have 8Gb+ of free space so, well. >> >> Does somebody have any idea about what could cause this error ? It would actually help me narrowing down the possibilities... >> I am using ubuntu 15.10 (old) so I will update it later today and check if it solves the problem. >> I will also try to update some libs, just in case. >> >> In the meantime, i will make a PR with the modified plugins files anyway, and see if it gets rejected or not. >> >> Sophie >> >> >> >> 2017-05-11 3:18 GMT+02:00 Ben Coman <[hidden email]>: >>> >>> >>> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 8:08 AM, tim Rowledge <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> >> On 10-05-2017, at 4:57 PM, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 02:36:20PM -0700, tim Rowledge wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 10-05-2017, at 1:47 PM, Sophie Kaleba <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Hi Tim, >>> >>>> >>> >>>> I hadn't thought about that, thanks ! I will make sure not to create any duplicate of these plugins >>> >>> >>> >>> I???ve never thought to experiment and see what happens if one tried to make both internal and external versions of the same plugin. I???d guess that it might not cause any problems in most cases.. hmm, unless on some platform you actually have to compile with different flags, and then maybe there???d be problems if the internal version were compiled with flag A, the ???.o??? file were left around, the external version compile process found it, therefore didn???t compile with flag B, thus making something fail? >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> I have not checked in a while, but I am pretty sure that it is perfectly >>> >> ok to have both an internally compiled plugin as part of the main VM >>> >> executable, and also an externally compiled version of the same plugin >>> >> (a loadable module in a file separate from the main VM executable). In >>> >> that case, the external plugin should override the internal one. >>> >> >>> >> The idea is that it should be easy to make an external plugin that might >>> >> add some new behaviour, and the plugin developer should be able to do >>> >> this without waiting for somebody else to distribute a new VM. >>> >> >>> >> If this is not the case, then it certainly /should/ be. Tim, weren't >>> >> you one of the people who invented this loadable module stuff in the >>> >> first place? >>> > >>> > D’oh, of course you’re right. Oh the joys of aging… >>> > >>> > And what I *should* have said was that I haven’t experimented with making internal and external versions within the same build process, given faint concerns about the object files maybe confusing the matter if one version is built and (incorrect) object files are left for the next version make-rule to find. >>> > So er, something like build BlobbyPlugin.c -> BlobbyPlugin.o -> link to make vm with internal BlobbyPlugin followed almost immediately by build BlobbyPlugin.c -> ooh, already got BlobbyPlugin.o -> make library BlobbyPlugin.la >>> > I’m imagining a situation where BlobbyPlugin.o actually ought to have been (re)compiled with subtly different flags in order to make a correct library. I may be being paranoid. Or maybe the OS is actually out to get me... >>> >>> Remember, just because you think you're paranoid doesn't mean they're >>> not watching you. |
On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 12:22 AM, Ben Coman <[hidden email]> wrote: > On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 12:00 PM, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> Hi Sophie, >> >> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Sophie Kaleba <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Update : >>> >>> I did add the plugins to the file. That was the easy part, it went well. >>> >>> Then it got trickier when I tried to actually build the (Pharo) VM (build.linux32x86/pharo.cog.spur/build.itimerheatbeat) with my brand new plugins : >>> >>> - at first, I had an error : "can't find PharoV50.sources". > > You're the fifth newcomer compiling the VM that I've seen bump into > this problem. > The fix PR has been available since last October... > https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/79 > > >>> >>> (I cloned the opensmalltalk-vm directory, >>> ran updateSCCSVersions >>> and then went in the "build.linux32x86/pharo.cog.spur/build.itimerheatbeat" and ran ./mvm -f ) >>> >>> Manually adding a "sources" directory containing the missing file solved the problem >>> Did I miss something on that part? >>> >>> >>> -OK, now, the VM is built with this small hack. >>> >>> When I try to use the VMProfiler (which works fine using the latest squeak VM from bintray), I get a segmentation fault, with this message : >>> >>> *** stack smashing detected ***: ./squeak terminated >>> output file stack is full. >> >> >> I wonder if this is some checking feature supported by the C compiler you're using. I expect that it is either disabled or not available in the VMs built on binary. I say this because there is no occurrence of the string 'stack smashing detected' in our sources and so expect it is being produced by the C runtime on your version of linux. > > The best description I found in a quick search is... > http://wiki.osdev.org/Stack_Smashing_Protector > > This implies a canary variable is being overwritten, which implies(??) > a legitimate smashed-stack, with the culprit perhaps being some other > protection mechanism like address space layout randomisation. > > Here is a detailed explanation including sample assembly code on the > second page. > http://www.drdobbs.com/security/anatomy-of-a-stack-smashing-attack-and-h/240001832 > >> >> The stack organization in the VM is a little unusual. The VM reserves space for a set of "stack pages" upon which Smalltalk activations exist. The space for the stack pages is allocated via alloca on the C stack at startup. It could be that this strange organization, which means that at some times, when the VM is executing C, the stack pointer is at the bottom end of the C stack, but when it is executing JITted Smalltalk code the stack pointer is somewhere in the middle of the C stack. I expect that the C runtime sees this happening and misinterprets it as an error. > > @Eliot, could ASLR cause assumptions about this memory layout to be violated? > > > > It could be related to EBP register "position independent executables" > http://forum.world.st/IMPORTANT-GCC-6-generates-position-independent-executables-by-default-on-Linux-td4935173.html > > This article mentions both Stack Smashing and EBP register but I can't > exactly tie them together. > https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~vsekar/Teaching/Fall16/18487-f16/reading/Makowski_2011_Smashing%20the%20Stack%20in%202011.pdf > > @Sophie, Could you report your OS and compiler version here? (sorry > if you've already done this elsewhere) Whoops, I meant add a few other links for background rading... * http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5863252/disabling-stack-smashing-protection-in-ubuntu-11-04 * https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/46716/is-there-a-way-to-deactivate-buffer-overflow-protection-on-my-machine * https://askubuntu.com/questions/318315/how-can-i-temporarily-disable-aslr-address-space-layout-randomization * https://askubuntu.com/questions/318315/how-can-i-temporarily-disable-aslr-address-space-layout-randomization > > cheers -ben > >> >> I expect further that you can, and should, disable such checking. >> >> HTH >> >> >>> >>> >>> I already ran into this error when I first tried to run the VMProfiler a few weeks ago. At that time, I was using a built Squeak VM (still linux32x86 , cog.spur, itimer). >>> Seeing that I got the same problem building both pharo and squeak vm (and not having it with vm I haven't actually built), I guess it has something to do with my environment. >>> I was told it could be caused by a near-full disk, but I still have 8Gb+ of free space so, well. >>> >>> Does somebody have any idea about what could cause this error ? It would actually help me narrowing down the possibilities... >>> I am using ubuntu 15.10 (old) so I will update it later today and check if it solves the problem. >>> I will also try to update some libs, just in case. >>> >>> In the meantime, i will make a PR with the modified plugins files anyway, and see if it gets rejected or not. >>> >>> Sophie >>> >>> >>> >>> 2017-05-11 3:18 GMT+02:00 Ben Coman <[hidden email]>: >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 8:08 AM, tim Rowledge <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >> On 10-05-2017, at 4:57 PM, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 02:36:20PM -0700, tim Rowledge wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>>> On 10-05-2017, at 1:47 PM, Sophie Kaleba <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Tim, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I hadn't thought about that, thanks ! I will make sure not to create any duplicate of these plugins >>>> >>> >>>> >>> I???ve never thought to experiment and see what happens if one tried to make both internal and external versions of the same plugin. I???d guess that it might not cause any problems in most cases.. hmm, unless on some platform you actually have to compile with different flags, and then maybe there???d be problems if the internal version were compiled with flag A, the ???.o??? file were left around, the external version compile process found it, therefore didn???t compile with flag B, thus making something fail? >>>> >>> >>>> >> >>>> >> I have not checked in a while, but I am pretty sure that it is perfectly >>>> >> ok to have both an internally compiled plugin as part of the main VM >>>> >> executable, and also an externally compiled version of the same plugin >>>> >> (a loadable module in a file separate from the main VM executable). In >>>> >> that case, the external plugin should override the internal one. >>>> >> >>>> >> The idea is that it should be easy to make an external plugin that might >>>> >> add some new behaviour, and the plugin developer should be able to do >>>> >> this without waiting for somebody else to distribute a new VM. >>>> >> >>>> >> If this is not the case, then it certainly /should/ be. Tim, weren't >>>> >> you one of the people who invented this loadable module stuff in the >>>> >> first place? >>>> > >>>> > D’oh, of course you’re right. Oh the joys of aging… >>>> > >>>> > And what I *should* have said was that I haven’t experimented with making internal and external versions within the same build process, given faint concerns about the object files maybe confusing the matter if one version is built and (incorrect) object files are left for the next version make-rule to find. >>>> > So er, something like build BlobbyPlugin.c -> BlobbyPlugin.o -> link to make vm with internal BlobbyPlugin followed almost immediately by build BlobbyPlugin.c -> ooh, already got BlobbyPlugin.o -> make library BlobbyPlugin.la >>>> > I’m imagining a situation where BlobbyPlugin.o actually ought to have been (re)compiled with subtly different flags in order to make a correct library. I may be being paranoid. Or maybe the OS is actually out to get me... >>>> >>>> Remember, just because you think you're paranoid doesn't mean they're >>>> not watching you. |
Hi, this info might be helpful. From my OpenBSD porting efforts, currently: .if ! ${PROPERTIES:Mlp64} # Any combination of one or more will build a non-crashing vm. #CC = clang #CFLAGS += -fno-pie MAKE_FLAGS += INTERP=cointerp .endif Stu > ---------- Original Message ---------- > From: Ben Coman <[hidden email]> > Date: May 13, 2017 at 12:26 PM > > > > On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 12:22 AM, Ben Coman <[hidden email]> wrote: > > On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 12:00 PM, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Sophie, > >> > >> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Sophie Kaleba <[hidden email]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> Update : > >>> > >>> I did add the plugins to the file. That was the easy part, it went well. > >>> > >>> Then it got trickier when I tried to actually build the (Pharo) VM (build.linux32x86/pharo.cog.spur/build.itimerheatbeat) with my brand new plugins : > >>> > >>> - at first, I had an error : "can't find PharoV50.sources". > > > > You're the fifth newcomer compiling the VM that I've seen bump into > > this problem. > > The fix PR has been available since last October... > > https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/pull/79 > > > > > >>> > >>> (I cloned the opensmalltalk-vm directory, > >>> ran updateSCCSVersions > >>> and then went in the "build.linux32x86/pharo.cog.spur/build.itimerheatbeat" and ran ./mvm -f ) > >>> > >>> Manually adding a "sources" directory containing the missing file solved the problem > >>> Did I miss something on that part? > >>> > >>> > >>> -OK, now, the VM is built with this small hack. > >>> > >>> When I try to use the VMProfiler (which works fine using the latest squeak VM from bintray), I get a segmentation fault, with this message : > >>> > >>> *** stack smashing detected ***: ./squeak terminated > >>> output file stack is full. > >> > >> > >> I wonder if this is some checking feature supported by the C compiler you're using. I expect that it is either disabled or not available in the VMs built on binary. I say this because there is no occurrence of the string 'stack smashing detected' in our sources and so expect it is being produced by the C runtime on your version of linux. > > > > The best description I found in a quick search is... > > http://wiki.osdev.org/Stack_Smashing_Protector > > > > This implies a canary variable is being overwritten, which implies(??) > > a legitimate smashed-stack, with the culprit perhaps being some other > > protection mechanism like address space layout randomisation. > > > > Here is a detailed explanation including sample assembly code on the > > second page. > > http://www.drdobbs.com/security/anatomy-of-a-stack-smashing-attack-and-h/240001832 > > > >> > >> The stack organization in the VM is a little unusual. The VM reserves space for a set of "stack pages" upon which Smalltalk activations exist. The space for the stack pages is allocated via alloca on the C stack at startup. It could be that this strange organization, which means that at some times, when the VM is executing C, the stack pointer is at the bottom end of the C stack, but when it is executing JITted Smalltalk code the stack pointer is somewhere in the middle of the C stack. I expect that the C runtime sees this happening and misinterprets it as an error. > > > > @Eliot, could ASLR cause assumptions about this memory layout to be violated? > > > > > > > > It could be related to EBP register "position independent executables" > > http://forum.world.st/IMPORTANT-GCC-6-generates-position-independent-executables-by-default-on-Linux-td4935173.html > > > > This article mentions both Stack Smashing and EBP register but I can't > > exactly tie them together. > > https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~vsekar/Teaching/Fall16/18487-f16/reading/Makowski_2011_Smashing%20the%20Stack%20in%202011.pdf > > > > @Sophie, Could you report your OS and compiler version here? (sorry > > if you've already done this elsewhere) > > Whoops, I meant add a few other links for background rading... > > * http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5863252/disabling-stack-smashing-protection-in-ubuntu-11-04 > * https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/46716/is-there-a-way-to-deactivate-buffer-overflow-protection-on-my-machine > * https://askubuntu.com/questions/318315/how-can-i-temporarily-disable-aslr-address-space-layout-randomization > * https://askubuntu.com/questions/318315/how-can-i-temporarily-disable-aslr-address-space-layout-randomization > > > > > > cheers -ben > > > >> > >> I expect further that you can, and should, disable such checking. > >> > >> HTH > >> > >> > >>> > >>> > >>> I already ran into this error when I first tried to run the VMProfiler a few weeks ago. At that time, I was using a built Squeak VM (still linux32x86 , cog.spur, itimer). > >>> Seeing that I got the same problem building both pharo and squeak vm (and not having it with vm I haven't actually built), I guess it has something to do with my environment. > >>> I was told it could be caused by a near-full disk, but I still have 8Gb+ of free space so, well. > >>> > >>> Does somebody have any idea about what could cause this error ? It would actually help me narrowing down the possibilities... > >>> I am using ubuntu 15.10 (old) so I will update it later today and check if it solves the problem. > >>> I will also try to update some libs, just in case. > >>> > >>> In the meantime, i will make a PR with the modified plugins files anyway, and see if it gets rejected or not. > >>> > >>> Sophie > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> 2017-05-11 3:18 GMT+02:00 Ben Coman <[hidden email]>: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 8:08 AM, tim Rowledge <[hidden email]> wrote: > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> >> On 10-05-2017, at 4:57 PM, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote: > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 02:36:20PM -0700, tim Rowledge wrote: > >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> >>>> On 10-05-2017, at 1:47 PM, Sophie Kaleba <[hidden email]> wrote: > >>>> >>>> > >>>> >>>> Hi Tim, > >>>> >>>> > >>>> >>>> I hadn't thought about that, thanks ! I will make sure not to create any duplicate of these plugins > >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> I???ve never thought to experiment and see what happens if one tried to make both internal and external versions of the same plugin. I???d guess that it might not cause any problems in most cases.. hmm, unless on some platform you actually have to compile with different flags, and then maybe there???d be problems if the internal version were compiled with flag A, the ???.o??? file were left around, the external version compile process found it, therefore didn???t compile with flag B, thus making something fail? > >>>> >>> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> I have not checked in a while, but I am pretty sure that it is perfectly > >>>> >> ok to have both an internally compiled plugin as part of the main VM > >>>> >> executable, and also an externally compiled version of the same plugin > >>>> >> (a loadable module in a file separate from the main VM executable). In > >>>> >> that case, the external plugin should override the internal one. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> The idea is that it should be easy to make an external plugin that might > >>>> >> add some new behaviour, and the plugin developer should be able to do > >>>> >> this without waiting for somebody else to distribute a new VM. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> If this is not the case, then it certainly /should/ be. Tim, weren't > >>>> >> you one of the people who invented this loadable module stuff in the > >>>> >> first place? > >>>> > > >>>> > D’oh, of course you’re right. Oh the joys of aging… > >>>> > > >>>> > And what I *should* have said was that I haven’t experimented with making internal and external versions within the same build process, given faint concerns about the object files maybe confusing the matter if one version is built and (incorrect) object files are left for the next version make-rule to find. > >>>> > So er, something like build BlobbyPlugin.c -> BlobbyPlugin.o -> link to make vm with internal BlobbyPlugin followed almost immediately by build BlobbyPlugin.c -> ooh, already got BlobbyPlugin.o -> make library BlobbyPlugin.la > >>>> > I’m imagining a situation where BlobbyPlugin.o actually ought to have been (re)compiled with subtly different flags in order to make a correct library. I may be being paranoid. Or maybe the OS is actually out to get me... > >>>> > >>>> Remember, just because you think you're paranoid doesn't mean they're > >>>> not watching you. |
In reply to this post by Ben Coman
Thanks all, I will have a look and have a look this evening. @David : it could be caused by the plugin indeed... But these are default plugins of the squeak vm, and I guess I should have had the problem while using the profiler on the latest squeak vm but I didn't, hm... I will try anyway I upgraded yesterday to ubuntu 16.04 and gcc 5.4. I just tried to build a pharo image but it failed due to some missing libs (due to the upgrade I guess). Sophie 2017-05-13 18:26 GMT+02:00 Ben Coman <[hidden email]>:
|
In reply to this post by Ben Coman
Hi Ben,
On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Ben Coman <[hidden email]> wrote:
I don't think so. Given that the Stack Zone is alloca'ed on the C stack it effectively stays in the same relative position to the C stack. It could be related to EBP register "position independent executables" That's an interesting thought. There is code executed at start-up (see platforms/Cross/vm/sqCogStackAlignment.h: extern sqInt cFramePointerInUse; platforms//unix/vm/sqUnixMain.c:isCFramePointerInUse()) t6hat attempts to find out if the frame pointer is in use and there-fore whether the glue code between the JIT and the C run-time should save and restore the frame pointer or not. This article mentions both Stack Smashing and EBP register but I can't Sophie, Ben, David, regarding the stack smashing, I did notice that there is a variable intended to stop recursive error reporting within the sigsegv handler (which also handles SIGBUS and SIGILL) that was not being set when an error occurred. This would have indeed causes an infinite recursion if the error reporting was, for example, fooled by the use of EBP as a general purpose register into crashing while trying to report an error. I committed the fix, and fixed the Mac VM. But we should still investigate exactly what the recursive crash is. BTW, the variable is oscogvm$ grep inFault platforms/unix/vm/* platforms/iOS/vm/Common/Classes/* platforms/unix/vm/sqUnixMain.c:static int inFault = 0; platforms/unix/vm/sqUnixMain.c: if (!inFault) { platforms/unix/vm/sqUnixMain.c: inFault = 1; platforms/iOS/vm/Common/Classes/sqSqueakMainApp.m:static int inFault = 0; platforms/iOS/vm/Common/Classes/sqSqueakMainApp.m: if (!inFault) { platforms/iOS/vm/Common/Classes/sqSqueakMainApp.m: inFault = 1;
_,,,^..^,,,_ best, Eliot |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |