| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Postmaster self-deadlock due to PLT linkage resolution |
| Date: | 2022-08-30 17:24:39 |
| Message-ID: | 3705480.1661880279@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2022-08-29 15:43:55 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The attached patch seems to fix the problem, by forcing resolution of
>> the PLT link before we unblock signals. It depends on the assumption
>> that another select() call appearing within postmaster.c will share
>> the same PLT link, which seems pretty safe.
> Hm, what stops the same problem from occuring with other functions?
These few lines are the only part of the postmaster that runs with
signals enabled and unblocked.
> Perhaps it'd be saner to default to building with -Wl,-z,now? That should fix
> the problem too, right (and if we combine it with relro, it'd be a security
> improvement to boot).
Hm. Not sure if that works on NetBSD, but I'll check it out.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2022-08-30 17:30:17 | Re: replacing role-level NOINHERIT with a grant-level option |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2022-08-30 17:17:20 | Re: Postmaster self-deadlock due to PLT linkage resolution |