[bug#43591] [PATCH core-updates] gnu: glibc-final: Catch all cases of a glibc user not requesting 64-bit offsets and then using readdir.

[Marius Bakke <marius@gnu.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3375 bytes --]

Danny Milosavljevic <dannym@scratchpost.org> writes:

> +                 ;; QEMU transparent emulation is in somewhat of a pickle sometimes.
> +                 ;; There is no support in the kernel syscalls of specifying what
> +                 ;; kind of userspace you are emulating.  Some parts of the
> +                 ;; structures passed back-and-forth between kernel and guest
> +                 ;; userspace can change size (including size of individual fields).
> +                 ;;
> +                 ;; One of the affected structures is "struct dirent".  The ext4
> +                 ;; file system puts a 64 bit hash into "d_off" on the kernel side.
> +                 ;; If the guest system's glibc is 32 bit it is going to be very
> +                 ;; confused (it does check whether d_off fits into the structure
> +                 ;; it gives back to the user--and it doesn't fit.  Hence readdir
> +                 ;; fails).
> +                 ;; This manifests itself in simple directory reads not working
> +                 ;; anymore in parts of cmake, for example.

Note that for CMake in particular, this problem will be fixed in 3.19:

  https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/-/issues/20568

As mentioned in that issue, and which this patch states on no uncertain
terms, a workaround is to use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 on 32-bit platforms.

> +                 ;;
> +                 ;; There is a very simple and complete way to avoid this problem:
> +                 ;; Just always use 64 bit offsets in user space programs (also
> +                 ;; on 32 bit machines).
> +                 ;;
> +                 ;; Note: We might want to avoid using 64 bit when bootstrapping
> +                 ;; using mescc (since mescc doesn't directly support 64 bit
> +                 ;; values)--but then bootstrapping has to be done on a
> +                 ;; file system other than ext4, or on ext4 with the feature
> +                 ;; "dir_index" disabled.
> +                 ;;
> +                 ;; The change below does not affect 64 bit users.
> +                 ;;
> +                 ;; See <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/43513>.
> +                 (let ((port (open-file "include/dirent.h" "a")))
> +                   (display "
> +#if __SIZEOF_LONG__ < 8
> +#ifndef __USE_FILE_OFFSET64
> +#undef readdir
> +#define readdir @READDIR_WITHOUT_FILE_OFFSET64_IS_A_REALLY_BAD_IDEA@

Won't this break _everything_ that uses readdir() without 64-bit
offsets?  Or does that @@ string get substituted by the glibc build
system somehow.

> +#endif
> +#endif
> +" port)
> +                   (close-port port))
> +                 ;; This file includes <dirent.h> and thus checks sanity already.
> +                 ;; TODO: Check dirent/scandir-tail.c, dirent/scandir64-tail.c.
> +                 (substitute* "posix/glob.c"
> +                  (("(#[ ]*define[ ][ ]*readdir)") "
> +#undef readdir
> +#define readdir"))

Can you file a bug report upstream about the duplicate definition(s)?

Enforcing this restriction in glibc feels rather sledgehammer-y.  Would
it make sense to introduce a GCC warning instead?  I'm sure there are
legitimate uses of smaller file offsets (i.e. embedded).  A GCC warning
will still break -Werror, but that's a lot more manageable than breaking
almost every use of readdir() on 32-bit platforms.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]