valgrind issues on Fedora 28 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tomas Vondra
Subject valgrind issues on Fedora 28
Date
Msg-id 90ac0452-e907-e7a4-b3c8-15bd33780e62@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: valgrind issues on Fedora 28  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Re: valgrind issues on Fedora 28  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

I've recently updated to Fedora 28, and in that environment I get quite 
a few new valgrind issues (see the attached log).

Essentially, all the reports start with either

==5971== Invalid read of size 32
==5971==    at 0x5957EB1: __wcsnlen_avx2 (in /usr/lib64/libc-2.27.so)
==5971==    by 0x589E871: wcsrtombs (in /usr/lib64/libc-2.27.so)
==5971==    by 0x5834000: wcstombs (in /usr/lib64/libc-2.27.so)
==5971==    by 0x97DD82: wchar2char (pg_locale.c:1641)

or

==5971== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
==5971==    at 0x5822123: __gconv_transform_internal_utf8 (in 
/usr/lib64/libc-2.27.so)
==5971==    by 0x589E8A4: wcsrtombs (in /usr/lib64/libc-2.27.so)
==5971==    by 0x5834000: wcstombs (in /usr/lib64/libc-2.27.so)
==5971==    by 0x97DD82: wchar2char (pg_locale.c:1641)

or some other combination of that. In all cases the call stack is

   wchar2char > wcstombs > wcsrtombs > something

I don't see these issues on the old (Fedora 26) environment, so it seems 
to be caused by updating either gcc or glibc:

old system:

* glibc-2.25-13.fc26.x86_64
* gcc version 7.3.1 20180130 (Red Hat 7.3.1-2) (GCC)

new system:

* glibc-2.27-32.fc28.x86_64
* gcc version 8.2.1 20181011 (Red Hat 8.2.1-4) (GCC)

Valgrind is the same (valgrind-3.13.0) in both cases. I'm not sure if 
it's due to some glibc changes, gcc generating different code, or 
something else.

I've tried to look at wcsrtombs in glibc, but it's not particularly 
readable piece of code. Also, my eyes bleed ... Thank god for pgindent!

I suspect it's either due to some glibc bug and/or gcc optimization that 
ends up touching memory that was not actually initialized (judging by 
__wcsnlen_avx2), or something like that. Not sure.


regards

-- 
Tomas Vondra                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Emre Hasegeli
Date:
Subject: Re: New Defects reported by Coverity Scan for PostgreSQL
Next
From: "REIX, Tony"
Date:
Subject: RE: Issue with v11.0 within jsonb_plperl tests in 32bit on AIX