From b7d807acd46bf5a9b697808b158f9cd124495d1f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: FabianNitsche Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2020 14:57:27 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Added missing trusty patches (#8185) --- cross/arm/trusty-lttng-2.4.patch | 71 +++++++++++++++++++++++ cross/arm/trusty.patch | 97 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 168 insertions(+) create mode 100644 cross/arm/trusty-lttng-2.4.patch create mode 100644 cross/arm/trusty.patch diff --git a/cross/arm/trusty-lttng-2.4.patch b/cross/arm/trusty-lttng-2.4.patch new file mode 100644 index 000000000..8e4dd7ae7 --- /dev/null +++ b/cross/arm/trusty-lttng-2.4.patch @@ -0,0 +1,71 @@ +From e72c9d7ead60e3317bd6d1fade995c07021c947b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 +From: Mathieu Desnoyers +Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 13:25:04 -0400 +Subject: [PATCH] Fix: building probe providers with C++ compiler + +Robert Daniels wrote: +> > I'm attempting to use lttng userspace tracing with a C++ application +> > on an ARM platform. I'm using GCC 4.8.4 on Linux 3.14 with the 2.6 +> > release of lttng. I've compiled lttng-modules, lttng-ust, and +> > lttng-tools and have been able to get a simple test working with C +> > code. When I attempt to run the hello.cxx test on my target it will +> > segfault. +> +> +> I spent a little time digging into this issue and finally discovered the +> cause of my segfault with ARM C++ tracepoints. +> +> There is a struct called 'lttng_event' in ust-events.h which contains an +> empty union 'u'. This was the cause of my issue. Under C, this empty union +> compiles to a zero byte member while under C++ it compiles to a one byte +> member, and in my case was four-byte aligned which caused my C++ code to +> have the 'cds_list_head node' offset incorrectly by four bytes. This lead +> to an incorrect linked list structure which caused my issue. +> +> Since this union is empty, I simply removed it from the struct and everything +> worked correctly. +> +> I don't know the history or purpose behind this empty union so I'd like to +> know if this is a safe fix. If it is I can submit a patch with the union +> removed. + +That's a very nice catch! + +We do not support building tracepoint probe provider with +g++ yet, as stated in lttng-ust(3): + +"- Note for C++ support: although an application instrumented with + tracepoints can be compiled with g++, tracepoint probes should be + compiled with gcc (only tested with gcc so far)." + +However, if it works fine with this fix, then I'm tempted to take it, +especially because removing the empty union does not appear to affect +the layout of struct lttng_event as seen from liblttng-ust, which must +be compiled with a C compiler, and from probe providers compiled with +a C compiler. So all we are changing is the layout of a probe provider +compiled with a C++ compiler, which is anyway buggy at the moment, +because it is not compatible with the layout expected by liblttng-ust +compiled with a C compiler. + +Reported-by: Robert Daniels +Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers +--- + include/lttng/ust-events.h | 2 -- + 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) + +diff --git a/usr/include/lttng/ust-events.h b/usr/include/lttng/ust-events.h +index 328a875..3d7a274 100644 +--- a/usr/include/lttng/ust-events.h ++++ b/usr/include/lttng/ust-events.h +@@ -407,8 +407,6 @@ struct lttng_event { + void *_deprecated1; + struct lttng_ctx *ctx; + enum lttng_ust_instrumentation instrumentation; +- union { +- } u; + struct cds_list_head node; /* Event list in session */ + struct cds_list_head _deprecated2; + void *_deprecated3; +-- +2.7.4 + diff --git a/cross/arm/trusty.patch b/cross/arm/trusty.patch new file mode 100644 index 000000000..2f2972f8e --- /dev/null +++ b/cross/arm/trusty.patch @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@ +diff -u -r a/usr/include/urcu/uatomic/generic.h b/usr/include/urcu/uatomic/generic.h +--- a/usr/include/urcu/uatomic/generic.h 2014-03-28 06:04:42.000000000 +0900 ++++ b/usr/include/urcu/uatomic/generic.h 2017-02-13 10:35:21.189927116 +0900 +@@ -65,17 +65,17 @@ + switch (len) { + #ifdef UATOMIC_HAS_ATOMIC_BYTE + case 1: +- return __sync_val_compare_and_swap_1(addr, old, _new); ++ return __sync_val_compare_and_swap_1((uint8_t *) addr, old, _new); + #endif + #ifdef UATOMIC_HAS_ATOMIC_SHORT + case 2: +- return __sync_val_compare_and_swap_2(addr, old, _new); ++ return __sync_val_compare_and_swap_2((uint16_t *) addr, old, _new); + #endif + case 4: +- return __sync_val_compare_and_swap_4(addr, old, _new); ++ return __sync_val_compare_and_swap_4((uint32_t *) addr, old, _new); + #if (CAA_BITS_PER_LONG == 64) + case 8: +- return __sync_val_compare_and_swap_8(addr, old, _new); ++ return __sync_val_compare_and_swap_8((uint64_t *) addr, old, _new); + #endif + } + _uatomic_link_error(); +@@ -100,20 +100,20 @@ + switch (len) { + #ifdef UATOMIC_HAS_ATOMIC_BYTE + case 1: +- __sync_and_and_fetch_1(addr, val); ++ __sync_and_and_fetch_1((uint8_t *) addr, val); + return; + #endif + #ifdef UATOMIC_HAS_ATOMIC_SHORT + case 2: +- __sync_and_and_fetch_2(addr, val); ++ __sync_and_and_fetch_2((uint16_t *) addr, val); + return; + #endif + case 4: +- __sync_and_and_fetch_4(addr, val); ++ __sync_and_and_fetch_4((uint32_t *) addr, val); + return; + #if (CAA_BITS_PER_LONG == 64) + case 8: +- __sync_and_and_fetch_8(addr, val); ++ __sync_and_and_fetch_8((uint64_t *) addr, val); + return; + #endif + } +@@ -139,20 +139,20 @@ + switch (len) { + #ifdef UATOMIC_HAS_ATOMIC_BYTE + case 1: +- __sync_or_and_fetch_1(addr, val); ++ __sync_or_and_fetch_1((uint8_t *) addr, val); + return; + #endif + #ifdef UATOMIC_HAS_ATOMIC_SHORT + case 2: +- __sync_or_and_fetch_2(addr, val); ++ __sync_or_and_fetch_2((uint16_t *) addr, val); + return; + #endif + case 4: +- __sync_or_and_fetch_4(addr, val); ++ __sync_or_and_fetch_4((uint32_t *) addr, val); + return; + #if (CAA_BITS_PER_LONG == 64) + case 8: +- __sync_or_and_fetch_8(addr, val); ++ __sync_or_and_fetch_8((uint64_t *) addr, val); + return; + #endif + } +@@ -180,17 +180,17 @@ + switch (len) { + #ifdef UATOMIC_HAS_ATOMIC_BYTE + case 1: +- return __sync_add_and_fetch_1(addr, val); ++ return __sync_add_and_fetch_1((uint8_t *) addr, val); + #endif + #ifdef UATOMIC_HAS_ATOMIC_SHORT + case 2: +- return __sync_add_and_fetch_2(addr, val); ++ return __sync_add_and_fetch_2((uint16_t *) addr, val); + #endif + case 4: +- return __sync_add_and_fetch_4(addr, val); ++ return __sync_add_and_fetch_4((uint32_t *) addr, val); + #if (CAA_BITS_PER_LONG == 64) + case 8: +- return __sync_add_and_fetch_8(addr, val); ++ return __sync_add_and_fetch_8((uint64_t *) addr, val); + #endif + } + _uatomic_link_error();