bug#33174: 27.0.50; Dump fails on GNU/Linux ppc64le

[Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>]

On 10/29/18 6:28 PM, Thomas Fitzsimmons wrote:
> I guess I could experiment with adding the PaX patches to my kernel so
> that XATTR_PAX would take effect, but I'm surprised Emacs can't complete
> the bootstrap step when the kernel is in a default configuration.

You're right, the XATTR_PAX stuff is likely a red herring. Emacs should 
be able to bootstrap without it by using the reexec trick, and 
bootstrapping does work on Fedora 28 (kernel 4.18.16-200.fc28.x86_64) 
without XATTR_PAX being used.

The main issue now, as I see it, is why Emacs is crashing on re-exec. 
That is, on my system after I run 'make SETFATTR=: bootstrap-emacs' to 
simulate a system without XATTR_PAX, the command

strace -o /tmp/tr ./temacs --batch  --load loadup bootstrap

generates the syscalls:

...
personality(0xffffffff)                 = 0 (PER_LINUX)
personality(PER_LINUX|ADDR_NO_RANDOMIZE) = 0 (PER_LINUX)
personality(0xffffffff)                 = 0x40000 
(PER_LINUX|ADDR_NO_RANDOMIZE)
execve("./temacs", ["./temacs", "--batch", "--load", "loadup", 
"bootstrap"], 0x852ee10 /* 73 vars */) = 0
...

whereas on your system Emacs is crashing instead of issuing the execve. 
I suspect that something like the following may help you debug:

$ cd src
$ make clean
$ make CFLAGS='-g3 -O0' SETFATTR=: temacs
$ gdb temacs
(gdb) set disable-randomization off
(gdb) b personality
(gdb) r --batch  --load loadup bootstrap

and then poke around to see what 'personality' is returning and whether 
'disable_address_randomization' succeeds and how 'execve' is being 
called. I guess on your host, personality (0xffffffff) returns 0, then 
personality (0x40000) returns 0, then personality (0xffffffff) returns 
0x40000, then disable_address_randomization () returns true, but it 
would be helpful to check this. The next thing should be that getenv 
("EMACS_HEAP_EXEC") returns NULL; is that what actually happens? And 
then xputenv ("EMACS_HEAP_EXEC=true") should work without crashing; is 
that right? And is execvp being called and with what arguments? That 
sort of thing.