I'm trying to make a C programm, that will execute subprocesses, which will be interact using semaphore.
Then I compile code, gcc throw referencing error - because it doesn't know about functions "sem_init", "sem_post" and "sem_wait", even though I include semaphore.h library.
Here's how it look:
Code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <semaphore.h>
#include <pthread.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#define LETTER_COUNT 26
#define THREADS 2
char letter[LETTER_COUNT] = "aBCDefghiJklMNoPqrsTuvWxyZ";
pthread_t t[THREADS];
sem_t sem[THREADS];
void print_letter(void) {
//print string
}
void* reorder(void* d) {
(void)d;
//do some work
return NULL;
}
void* switch_case(void* d) {
(void)d;
//do some work
return NULL;
}
int main(void) {
int i;
for(i = 0; i < THREADS; i++) {
if(sem_init(&sem[i], 0, 0) == -1) {
perror("sem_init");
return -1;
}
}
pthread_create(&t[0], NULL, reorder, NULL);
pthread_create(&t[1], NULL, switch_case, NULL);
while(1) {
i = (i + 1) % (THREADS - 1);
sem_post(&sem[i]);
sem_wait(&sem[2]);
print_letter();
sleep(1);
}
return 0;
}
Error:
gcc -Wall task4.c -o task4.o
Undefined first referenced
symbol in file
sem_init /var/tmp//cc0i56ka.o
sem_post /var/tmp//cc0i56ka.o
sem_wait /var/tmp//cc0i56ka.o
ld: fatal: symbol referencing errors. No output written to task4.o
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
I'm trying to find some information about this problem, but I can't find any working solutions. Maybe I should use some compilation flag (like -lsocket)?
As per man sem_init (and friends)
gcc -Wall task4.c -o task4.o -lpthread
On some system, the 'librt' shared library is built against shared libpthread, and referencing -lrt will imply -lpthread. However the man page indicate the proper command to link is to use -pthread, see below. Note that -pthread will invoke MT semantics, as needed, usually -lpthread, but other libraries, flags or #defines. For example, on GCC/Mint19, it will define -D_REENTRANT.
From man sem_init
AME
sem_init - initialize an unnamed semaphore
SYNOPSIS
#include
int sem_init(sem_t *sem, int pshared, unsigned int value);
Link with -lpthread.
From man gcc
Options Controlling the Preprocessor
-pthread
Define additional macros required for using the POSIX threads library. You should use this option consistently for both compilation
and linking. This option is supported on GNU/Linux targets, most other Unix derivatives, and also on x86 Cygwin and MinGW targets.
Options for Linking
-pthread
Link with the POSIX threads library. This option is supported on GNU/Linux targets, most other Unix derivatives, and also on x86
Cygwin and MinGW targets. On some targets this option also sets flags for the preprocessor, so it should be used consistently for both
compilation and linking.
Related
So everyone probably knows that glibc's /lib/libc.so.6 can be executed in the shell like a normal executable in which cases it prints its version information and exits. This is done via defining an entry point in the .so. For some cases it could be interesting to use this for other projects too. Unfortunately, the low-level entry point you can set by ld's -e option is a bit too low-level: the dynamic loader is not available so you cannot call any proper library functions. glibc for this reason implements the write() system call via a naked system call in this entry point.
My question now is, can anyone think of a nice way how one could bootstrap a full dynamic linker from that entry point so that one could access functions from other .so's?
Update 2: see Andrew G Morgan's slightly more complicated solution which does work for any GLIBC (that solution is also used in libc.so.6 itself (since forever), which is why you can run it as ./libc.so.6 (it prints version info when invoked that way)).
Update 1: this no longer works with newer GLIBC versions:
./a.out: error while loading shared libraries: ./pie.so: cannot dynamically load position-independent executable
Original answer from 2009:
Building your shared library with -pie option appears to give you everything you want:
/* pie.c */
#include <stdio.h>
int foo()
{
printf("in %s %s:%d\n", __func__, __FILE__, __LINE__);
return 42;
}
int main()
{
printf("in %s %s:%d\n", __func__, __FILE__, __LINE__);
return foo();
}
/* main.c */
#include <stdio.h>
extern int foo(void);
int main()
{
printf("in %s %s:%d\n", __func__, __FILE__, __LINE__);
return foo();
}
$ gcc -fPIC -pie -o pie.so pie.c -Wl,-E
$ gcc main.c ./pie.so
$ ./pie.so
in main pie.c:9
in foo pie.c:4
$ ./a.out
in main main.c:6
in foo pie.c:4
$
P.S. glibc implements write(3) via system call because it doesn't have anywhere else to call (it is the lowest level already). This has nothing to do with being able to execute libc.so.6.
I have been looking to add support for this to pam_cap.so, and found this question. As #EmployedRussian notes in a follow-up to their own post, the accepted answer stopped working at some point. It took a while to figure out how to make this work again, so here is a worked example.
This worked example involves 5 files to show how things work with some corresponding tests.
First, consider this trivial program (call it empty.c):
int main(int argc, char **argv) { return 0; }
Compiling it, we can see how it resolves the dynamic symbols on my system as follows:
$ gcc -o empty empty.c
$ objcopy --dump-section .interp=/dev/stdout empty ; echo
/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
$ DL_LOADER=/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
That last line sets a shell variable for use later.
Here are the two files that build my example shared library:
/* multi.h */
void multi_main(void);
void multi(const char *caller);
and
/* multi.c */
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include "multi.h"
void multi(const char *caller) {
printf("called from %s\n", caller);
}
__attribute__((force_align_arg_pointer))
void multi_main(void) {
multi(__FILE__);
exit(42);
}
const char dl_loader[] __attribute__((section(".interp"))) =
DL_LOADER ;
(Update 2021-11-13: The forced alignment is to help __i386__ code be SSE compatible - without it we get hard to debug glibc SIGSEGV crashes.)
We can compile and run it as follows:
$ gcc -fPIC -shared -o multi.so -DDL_LOADER="\"${DL_LOADER}\"" multi.c -Wl,-e,multi_main
$ ./multi.so
called from multi.c
$ echo $?
42
So, this is a .so that can be executed as a stand alone binary. Next, we validate that it can be loaded as shared object.
/* opener.c */
#include <dlfcn.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
void *handle = dlopen("./multi.so", RTLD_NOW);
if (handle == NULL) {
perror("no multi.so load");
exit(1);
}
void (*multi)(const char *) = dlsym(handle, "multi");
multi(__FILE__);
}
That is we dynamically load the shared-object and run a function from it:
$ gcc -o opener opener.c -ldl
$ ./opener
called from opener.c
Finally, we link against this shared object:
/* main.c */
#include "multi.h"
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
multi(__FILE__);
}
Where we compile and run it as follows:
$ gcc main.c -o main multi.so
$ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=./ ./main
called from main.c
(Note, because multi.so isn't in a standard system library location, we need to override where the runtime looks for the shared object file with the LD_LIBRARY_PATH environment variable.)
I suppose you'd have your ld -e point to an entry point which would then use the dlopen() family of functions to find and bootstrap the rest of the dynamic linker. Of course you'd have to ensure that dlopen() itself was either statically linked or you might have to implement enough of your own linker stub to get at it (using system call interfaces such as mmap() just as libc itself is doing.
None of that sounds "nice" to me. In fact just the thought of reading the glibc sources (and the ld-linux source code, as one example) enough to assess the size of the job sounds pretty hoary to me. It might also be a portability nightmare. There may be major differences between how Linux implements ld-linux and how the linkages are done under OpenSolaris, FreeBSD, and so on. (I don't know).
The Actual Problem
I have an executable that by default uses EGL and SDL 1.2 to handle graphics and user input respectively. Using LD_PRELOAD, I have replaced both with GLFW.
This works normally unless the user has installed the Wayland version of GLFW, which depends on EGL itself. Because all the EGL calls are either stubbed to do nothing or call GLFW equivalents, it doesn't work (ie. eglSwapBuffers calls glfwSwapBuffers which calls eglSwapBuffers and so on). I can't remove the EGL stubs because then it would call both EGL and GLFW and the main executable is closed-source so I can't modify that.
Is there any way to make LD_PRELOAD affect the main executable but not GLFW? Or any other solution to obtain the same effect?
The Simplified Problem
I made a simplified example to demonstrate the problem.
Main Executable:
#include <stdio.h>
extern void do_something();
int main() {
do_something();
fputs("testing B\n", stderr);
}
Shared Library:
#include <stdio.h>
void do_something() {
fputs("testing A\n", stderr);
}
Preloaded Library:
#include <stdio.h>
int fputs(const char *str, FILE *file) {
// Do Nothing
return 0;
}
When the preloaded library isn't used, the output is:
testing A
testing B
When it is used, the output is nothing.
I'm looking for a way to make the preloaded library only affect the main executable, that the output would be:
testing A
Thank you!
You can check if the return address is in the executable or the library, and then call either the "real" function or do your stub code, like this:
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <dlfcn.h>
#include <link.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
static struct {
ElfW(Addr) start, end;
} *segments;
static int n;
static int (*real_fputs)(const char *, FILE *);
static int callback(struct dl_phdr_info *info, size_t size, void *data) {
n = info->dlpi_phnum;
segments = malloc(n * sizeof *segments);
for(int i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
segments[i].start = info->dlpi_addr + info->dlpi_phdr[i].p_vaddr;
segments[i].end = info->dlpi_addr + info->dlpi_phdr[i].p_vaddr + info->dlpi_phdr[i].p_memsz;
}
return 1;
}
__attribute__((__constructor__))
static void setup(void) {
real_fputs = dlsym(RTLD_NEXT, "fputs");
dl_iterate_phdr(callback, NULL);
}
__attribute__((__destructor__))
static void teardown(void) {
free(segments);
}
__attribute__((__noinline__))
int fputs(const char *str, FILE *file) {
ElfW(Addr) addr = (ElfW(Addr))__builtin_extract_return_addr(__builtin_return_address(0));
for(int i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
if(addr >= segments[i].start && addr < segments[i].end) {
// Do Nothing
return 0;
}
}
return real_fputs(str, file);
}
This has some caveats, though. For example, if your executable calls a library function that tail-calls a function you're hooking, then this will incorrectly consider that library call an executable call. (You could mitigate this problem by adding wrappers for those library functions too, that unconditionally forward to the "real" function, and compiling the wrapper code with -fno-optimize-sibling-calls.) Also, there's no way to distinguish whether anonymous executable memory (e.g., JITted code) originally came from the executable or a library.
To test this, save my code as hook_fputs.c, your main executable as main.c, and your shared library as libfoo.c. Then run these commands:
clang -fPIC -shared hook_fputs.c -ldl -o hook_fputs.so
clang -fPIC -shared libfoo.c -o libfoo.so
clang main.c ./libfoo.so
LD_PRELOAD=./hook_fputs.so ./a.out
Implement the interposing library separately for the two cases.
Create a wrapper script or program that uses ldd to find out the exact EGL library version and their paths the target binary is dynamically linked against; then, using ldd on the the GLFW library, to find out whether it is linked against EGL or not. Finally, have it execute the target binary with the path to the appropriate interposing library in LD_PRELOAD environment variable.
I have some application for which I need to write extension using shared library. In my shared library I need to use threads. And main application neither uses threads neither linked with threads library (libpthread.so, for example).
As first tests showed my library causes crashes of the main application. And if i use LD_PRELOAD hack crashes goes away:
LD_PRELOAD=/path/to/libpthread.so ./app
The only OS where i have no segfaults without LD_PRELOAD hack is OS X. On other it just crashes. I tested: Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD.
My question is: is there a way to make my threaded shared library safe for non-threaded application without changing of the main application and LD_PRELOAD hacks?
To reproduce the problem i wrote simple example:
mylib.c
#include <pthread.h>
#include <assert.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/socket.h>
#include <netdb.h>
pthread_mutex_t mutex = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER;
void *_thread(void *arg) {
int i;
struct addrinfo *res;
for (i=0; i<10000; i++) {
if (getaddrinfo("localhost", NULL, NULL, &res) == 0) {
if (res) freeaddrinfo(res);
}
}
pthread_mutex_lock(&mutex);
printf("Just another thread message!\n");
pthread_mutex_unlock(&mutex);
return NULL;
}
void make_thread() {
pthread_t tid[10];
int i, rc;
for (i=0; i<10; i++) {
rc = pthread_create(&tid[i], NULL, _thread, NULL);
assert(rc == 0);
}
void *rv;
for (i=0; i<10; i++) {
rc = pthread_join(tid[i], &rv);
assert(rc == 0);
}
}
main.c
#include <stdio.h>
#include <dlfcn.h>
int main() {
void *mylib_hdl;
void (*make_thread)();
mylib_hdl = dlopen("./libmy.so", RTLD_NOW);
if (mylib_hdl == NULL) {
printf("dlopen: %s\n", dlerror());
return 1;
}
make_thread = (void (*)()) dlsym(mylib_hdl, "make_thread");
if (make_thread == NULL) {
printf("dlsym: %s\n", dlerror());
return 1;
}
(*make_thread)();
return 0;
}
Makefile
all:
cc -pthread -fPIC -c mylib.c
cc -pthread -shared -o libmy.so mylib.o
cc -o main main.c -ldl
clean:
rm *.o *.so main
And all together: https://github.com/olegwtf/sandbox/tree/bbbf76fdefe4bacef8a0de7a2475995719ae0436/threaded-so-for-non-threaded-app
$ make
cc -pthread -fPIC -c mylib.c
cc -pthread -shared -o libmy.so mylib.o
cc -o main main.c -ldl
$ ./main
*** glibc detected *** ./main: double free or corruption (fasttop): 0x0000000001614c40 ***
Segmentation fault
$ ldd libmy.so | grep thr
libpthread.so.0 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0 (0x00007fe7e2591000)
$ LD_PRELOAD=/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0 ./main
Just another thread message!
Just another thread message!
Just another thread message!
Just another thread message!
Just another thread message!
Just another thread message!
Just another thread message!
Just another thread message!
Just another thread message!
Just another thread message!
My question is: is there a way to make my threaded shared library safe
for non-threaded application without changing of the main application
and LD_PRELOAD hacks?
No, those are the two ways you can make it work. With neither in place, your program is invalid.
dlopen is supposed to do the right thing, and to open all the libraries your own .so depends upon.
In fact, your code is working for me if I comment out the address lookup code that you placed inside your thread function. So loading the pthread library works perfectly.
And if I run the code including the lookup, valgrind shows me that the crash is below getaddrinfo.
So the problem is not that the libraries aren't loaded, somehow their initialization code is not executed or not in the right order.
gdb helped to understand what's goin on with this example.
After 3 tries gdb showed that app always crashed at rewind.c line 36 inside libc. Since tests were run on Debian 7, libc implementation is eglibc. And here you can see line 36 of rewind.c:
http://www.eglibc.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/branches/eglibc-2_13/libc/libio/rewind.c?annotate=12752
_IO_acquire_lock() is a macros and after grepping eglibc source I found 2 places where it is defined:
bits/stdio-lock.h line 49: http://www.eglibc.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/branches/eglibc-2_13/libc/bits/stdio-lock.h?annotate=12752
sysdeps/pthread/bits/stdio-lock.h line 91: http://www.eglibc.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/branches/eglibc-2_13/libc/nptl/sysdeps/pthread/bits/stdio-lock.h?annotate=12752
Comment for first says Generic version and for second NPTL version, where NTPL is Native POSIX Thread Library. So in few words first defines non-threaded implementation for this and several other macroses and second threaded implementation.
When our main application is not linked with pthreads it starts and loads this first non-threaded implementation of _IO_acquire_lock() and others macroses. Then it opens our threaded shared library and executes function from it. And this function uses already loaded and non thread safe version of _IO_acquire_lock(). However in fact should use threads compatible version defined by pthreads. This is where segfault occures.
This is how it works on Linux. On *BSD situation is even more sad. On FreeBSD your program will hang up immediately after your threaded library will try to create new thread. On NetBSD instead of hang up program will be terminated with SIGABRT.
So answering to the main question: is it possible to use threaded shared library from application not linked with pthreads?
In general -- no. And particularly this depends on libc implementation. For OS X, for example, this will work without any problems. For Linux this will work if you'll not use libc functions that uses such special macroses redefined by pthreads. But how to know which uses? Ok, you can make 1+1, this looks safe. On *BSD your program will crash or hang up immediately, no matter what your thread do.
I am trying to build a program in C which has a lot of optional features that depend on various shared libraries.
In our heterogeneous computing cluster not all of those libraries are available (or up to date) on all systems.
Examples are symbols from newer glibc (sched_getcpu##GLIBC_2.6, __sched_cpucount##GLIBC_2.6) or whole shared libraries which may or may not be available (libnuma, libR, libpbs).
I know that I can use libdl to load the symbols with dlopen and dlsym, but doing this for an ever growing number of symbols (around 30 at the moment) is tedious at best.
As far as I understand shared libraries in Linux are lazy-loaded by default, so a symbol should not be needed until it is actually used.
But if I try to check for that in advance then it fails at execution start:
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdint.h>
#include <dlfcn.h>
#include <sched.h>
int main() {
void *lib_handle;
int (*fn)(void);
int x;
char *error;
lib_handle = dlopen("libc.so.6", RTLD_LAZY);
if (!lib_handle)
{
fprintf(stderr, "%s\n", dlerror());
exit(1);
}
fn = dlsym(lib_handle, "sched_getcpu");
if ((error = dlerror()) != NULL)
{
fprintf(stderr, "%s\n", error);
exit(1);
}
printf("%d\n", sched_getcpu());
return 0;
}
On compile system which has all libraries:
$ icc test.c
$ ./a.out
10
On another system which has a less recent version of GLIBC:
$ ./a.out
./a.out: /lib64/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.6' not found (required by ./a.out)
If I comment out the line that actually calls sched_getcpu then I get instead on the lesser system:
$ ./a.out
/lib64/libc.so.6: undefined symbol: sched_getcpu
So, is there a way to force libraries only to be loaded on use and have checks like these before blocks that use them?
Not with glibc. This is a fail-safe and it's in place so that you won't shoot yourself in the foot. If the GLIBC_2.6 symbol wasn't defined and looked up, even if there were no other missing symbols, you could get garbage results from glibc (data corruption and crashes,) since it's not forwards compatible.
If you need compatibility on the glibc level, you need to build against the lowest common version.
I'm looking for a way to atomically increment a short, and then return that value. I need to do this both in kernel mode and in user mode, so it's in C, under Linux, on Intel 32bit architecture. Unfortunately, due to speed requirements, a mutex lock isn't going to be a good option.
Is there any other way to do this? At this point, it seems like the only option available is to inline some assembly. If that's the case, could someone point me towards the appropriate instructions?
GCC __atomic_* built-ins
As of GCC 4.8, __sync built-ins have been deprecated in favor of the __atomic built-ins: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.8.2/gcc/_005f_005fatomic-Builtins.html
They implement the C++ memory model, and std::atomic uses them internally.
The following POSIX threads example fails consistently with ++ on x86-64, and always works with _atomic_fetch_add.
main.c
#include <assert.h>
#include <pthread.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
enum CONSTANTS {
NUM_THREADS = 1000,
NUM_ITERS = 1000
};
int global = 0;
void* main_thread(void *arg) {
int i;
for (i = 0; i < NUM_ITERS; ++i) {
__atomic_fetch_add(&global, 1, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST);
/* This fails consistently. */
/*global++*/;
}
return NULL;
}
int main(void) {
int i;
pthread_t threads[NUM_THREADS];
for (i = 0; i < NUM_THREADS; ++i)
pthread_create(&threads[i], NULL, main_thread, NULL);
for (i = 0; i < NUM_THREADS; ++i)
pthread_join(threads[i], NULL);
assert(global == NUM_THREADS * NUM_ITERS);
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
Compile and run:
gcc -std=c99 -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -o main.out ./main.c -pthread
./main.out
Disassembly analysis at: How do I start threads in plain C?
Tested in Ubuntu 18.10, GCC 8.2.0, glibc 2.28.
C11 _Atomic
In 5.1, the above code works with:
_Atomic int global = 0;
global++;
And C11 threads.h was added in glibc 2.28, which allows you to create threads in pure ANSI C without POSIX, minimal runnable example: How do I start threads in plain C?
GCC supports atomic operations:
gcc atomics