From: Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org> To: Sergey Kaplun <skaplun@tarantool.org> Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit 2/2] Different fix for partial snapshot restore due to stack overflow. Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 19:15:11 +0300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <9d1c7b94-b18d-4290-b017-27ac9e4f6ef2@tarantool.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <1152e27d618a4717c0f48cb77d085434eb183b18.1749550966.git.skaplun@tarantool.org> [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4879 bytes --] Hello, Sergey! Thanks for the patch! See a comment below. Sergey On 6/10/25 13:28, Sergey Kaplun wrote: > From: Mike Pall <mike> > > Reported by Junlong Li. Fixed by Peter Cawley. > > (cherry picked from commit 86e7123bb1782a5f200ba5e83b8c4f3fbad4f7bc) > > This patch is a follow-up to the previous commit, which leads to a dirty > read of the pseudo-valid PC set for the cframe on snapshot restoration. > To avoid these dirty reads, this patch sets the PC to the outer frame > as well before possible error throwing. > > Sergey Kaplun: > * added the description and the test for the problem > > Part of tarantool/tarantool#11278 > --- > src/lj_snap.c | 3 +- > src/lj_trace.c | 4 +- > ...-1196-stack-overflow-snap-restore.test.lua | 65 +++++++++++++++++++ > 3 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 test/tarantool-tests/lj-1196-stack-overflow-snap-restore.test.lua > > diff --git a/src/lj_snap.c b/src/lj_snap.c > index 8d7bd868..4cfae579 100644 > --- a/src/lj_snap.c > +++ b/src/lj_snap.c > @@ -955,7 +955,8 @@ const BCIns *lj_snap_restore(jit_State *J, void *exptr) > lua_State *L = J->L; > > /* Set interpreter PC to the next PC to get correct error messages. */ > - setcframe_pc(cframe_raw(L->cframe), pc+1); > + setcframe_pc(L->cframe, pc+1); > + setcframe_pc(cframe_raw(cframe_prev(L->cframe)), pc); > > /* Make sure the stack is big enough for the slots from the snapshot. */ > if (LJ_UNLIKELY(L->base + snap->topslot >= tvref(L->maxstack))) { > diff --git a/src/lj_trace.c b/src/lj_trace.c > index 8a18d3cf..0d1d233a 100644 > --- a/src/lj_trace.c > +++ b/src/lj_trace.c > @@ -909,10 +909,8 @@ int LJ_FASTCALL lj_trace_exit(jit_State *J, void *exptr) > exd.J = J; > exd.exptr = exptr; > errcode = lj_vm_cpcall(L, NULL, &exd, trace_exit_cp); > - if (errcode) { > - setcframe_pc(cframe_raw(L->cframe), L); /* Point to any valid memory. */ > + if (errcode) > return -errcode; /* Return negated error code. */ > - } > > if (exitcode) copyTV(L, L->top++, &exiterr); /* Anchor the error object. */ > > diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-1196-stack-overflow-snap-restore.test.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-1196-stack-overflow-snap-restore.test.lua > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000..942d1f82 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-1196-stack-overflow-snap-restore.test.lua > @@ -0,0 +1,65 @@ > +local tap = require('tap') > + > +-- Test file to demonstrate LuaJIT dirty reads after stack > +-- overflow during restoration from the snapshot. > +-- The test fails before the patch under Valgrind. Please specify valgrind option that is required for reproducing the bug. Cannot reproduce with command line below with reverted patch: VALGRIND_OPTS="--leak-check=no --malloc-fill=0x00 --free-fill=0x00" ctest -V -R test/tarantool-tests/lj-1196-partial-snap-restore.test.lua -V > +-- > +-- luacheck: push no max_comment_line_length > +-- > +-- See also:https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/1196, > +--https://www.freelists.org/post/luajit/Invalid-read-found-by-valgrind. > +-- > +-- luacheck: pop > + > +local test = tap.test('lj-1196-stack-overflow-snap-restore') > + > +test:plan(4) > + > +-- XXX: This file has the same tests as the > +-- <test/LuaJIT-tests/lang/stackov.lua>, but without disabling the > +-- compilation for the given functions. Hence, the check here is > +-- less strict -- we just check that there are no dirty reads, > +-- uninitialized memory access, etc. > + > +local function recursive_f_noarg() > + recursive_f_noarg() > +end > + > +local function recursive_one_arg(argument) > + recursive_one_arg(argument) > +end > + > +local function recursive_f_vararg(...) > + recursive_f_vararg(1, ...) > +end > + > +local function recursive_f_vararg_tail(...) > + return recursive_f_vararg_tail(1, ...) > +end > + > +-- Use `coroutine.wrap()`, for independent stack sizes. > +-- The invalid read is done by the error handler > +-- `debug.traceback()`, since it observes the pseudo PC (`L`) and > +-- reads the memory by `L - 4` address before the patch. > + > +coroutine.wrap(function() > + local status = xpcall(recursive_f_noarg, debug.traceback) > +test:ok(not status, 'correct status, recursive no arguments') > +end)() > + > +coroutine.wrap(function() > + local status = xpcall(recursive_one_arg, debug.traceback, 1) > +test:ok(not status, 'correct status, recursive one argument') > +end)() > + > +coroutine.wrap(function() > + local status = xpcall(recursive_f_vararg, debug.traceback, 1) > +test:ok(not status, 'correct status, recursive vararg') > +end)() > + > +coroutine.wrap(function() > + local status = xpcall(recursive_f_vararg_tail, debug.traceback, 1) > +test:ok(not status, 'correct status, recursive vararg tail') > +end)() > + > +test:done(true) [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5865 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-10 16:15 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2025-06-10 10:28 [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit 0/2] Snapshot restore with " Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches 2025-06-10 10:28 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit 1/2] Handle partial snapshot restore due to " Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches 2025-06-10 15:29 ` Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches 2025-06-10 16:03 ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches 2025-06-10 10:28 ` [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit 2/2] Different fix for " Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches 2025-06-10 16:15 ` Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches [this message] 2025-06-10 16:22 ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches 2025-06-11 9:36 ` Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches
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=9d1c7b94-b18d-4290-b017-27ac9e4f6ef2@tarantool.org \ --to=tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org \ --cc=sergeyb@tarantool.org \ --cc=skaplun@tarantool.org \ --subject='Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit 2/2] Different fix for partial snapshot restore due to stack overflow.' \ /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
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox