DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 delorie.com 5BNHgAsp3758057 Authentication-Results: delorie.com; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=cygwin.com Authentication-Results: delorie.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cygwin.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 delorie.com 5BNHgAsp3758057 Authentication-Results: delorie.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=cygwin.com header.i=@cygwin.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=T9ntjVe/ X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 370284BA2E23 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com; s=default; t=1766511729; bh=2FtMiDGY+0fHpQUVk9zxczdZis+aLN0jYqvnIi97aTo=; h=Date:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To: From; b=T9ntjVe/bTeXYwehO5r1YvNS5NeamG02KlPEbFJZMabzHFCIRByTxy582VR/o8knr 2wT3tgD8BjBEqxBuGwH/HOdiZ7epntpUEtEx7sVavWzHmlbfMAWwScb43nwwbWkU8x TNbYyT98GXjWxFLJehkJj3tAvqXqrrGul9S3aHYI= X-Original-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 9827B4BA2E05 ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 9827B4BA2E05 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1766511673; cv=none; b=q5fRB2SRtSaLu29hyRRln2VBM+p+73ubjN48QVKR1duV+/S044G1oyY4uElcn3I3Y0aU8pqvrUZtgeGM7feR/oOujCrbd28UG2oDHqKB6N9S7wH21Q3eO6gYk1qxNpAXh7T8MadG6R5gw8uMqNRmWtek4llB0diQ6T1QqZdUvSU= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1766511673; c=relaxed/simple; bh=nnemRvTcco9iRFE39Q0TntF/ZZ0bp/hX161SFGKqDi8=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Mime-Version:DKIM-Signature; b=GLVVFjvpVBSFsTiUy/Z21T1AW3NLt+BdEE3+AkqfRHDbyBxJsJGKUlv8g5eW0/R4IdxCcg24aoLJ+q6ZlsJp2tWHi1a1z3egNnqtoBEfz38fZv+8vsEHyAcVPaeAHZhLJXLHqmrD/MQNC8QDg2ZNITMChhnTMeuolDlJuqUPwMQ= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 9827B4BA2E05 Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2025 02:41:09 +0900 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Recent testsuite/winsup.api/pthread/cancel2 failure Message-Id: <20251224024109.3fad5d4d8aced800ad916caf@nifty.ne.jp> In-Reply-To: <20251223190713.e2efc476782898d55f00b64f@nifty.ne.jp> References: <20251214162637 DOT 1ee05b084788ba073fe94670 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp> <20251214163936 DOT 6841fc62145d8f54cfa31fe7 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp> <9d058204-fb3f-43b4-9e32-6adc7af12ff4 AT dronecode DOT org DOT uk> <20251217193737 DOT 3d3d686ebe3865c183315dc5 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp> <20251222230450 DOT a2e308861cebfab9cdb5dcc1 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp> <20251222233746 DOT d45ae16e4e06de5af7b27f26 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp> <20251223190713 DOT e2efc476782898d55f00b64f AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.30; i686-pc-mingw32) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Takashi Yano via Cygwin Reply-To: Takashi Yano Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com Sender: "Cygwin" On Tue, 23 Dec 2025 19:07:13 +0900 Takashi Yano wrote: > On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 16:46:53 +0100 > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > On Dec 22 23:37, Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote: > > > Alignment issue? > > > > > > This might be the right thing. > > > > > > diff --git a/winsup/cygwin/thread.cc b/winsup/cygwin/thread.cc > > > index 86a00e76e..ec1e3c98c 100644 > > > --- a/winsup/cygwin/thread.cc > > > +++ b/winsup/cygwin/thread.cc > > > @@ -630,6 +630,8 @@ pthread::cancel () > > > threadlist_t *tl_entry = cygheap->find_tls (cygtls); > > > if (!cygtls->inside_kernel (&context)) > > > { > > > + if ((context._CX_stackPtr & 8) == 0) > > > + context._CX_stackPtr -= 8; > > > > Does that really help? Checking for 8 byte alignment is usually done > > with (X & 7) != 0, because this won't catch 16 byte aligned stacks. > > This code does not aim for 8 byte alignment, but 16n + 8. I assume > context._CX_stackPtr & 7 is always 0. I wonder if this assumption > is true. What if user code pushes 16 bit register such as AX? > It might be necessary to mask least 3 bits in advance. > > diff --git a/winsup/cygwin/thread.cc b/winsup/cygwin/thread.cc > index 86a00e76e..628aef16f 100644 > --- a/winsup/cygwin/thread.cc > +++ b/winsup/cygwin/thread.cc > @@ -630,6 +630,9 @@ pthread::cancel () > threadlist_t *tl_entry = cygheap->find_tls (cygtls); > if (!cygtls->inside_kernel (&context)) > { > + context._CX_stackPtr &= 0xfffffffffffffff8UL; > + if ((context._CX_stackPtr & 8) == 0) > + context._CX_stackPtr -= 8; > context._CX_instPtr = (ULONG_PTR) pthread::static_cancel_self; > SetThreadContext (win32_obj_id, &context); > } > > > But afaic the stack is always 8 byte aligned anyway. However, there are > > some scenarios where 16 byte alignment is required, as for context > > itself when calling RtlCaptureContext. Maybe that's the problem here? > > I think so. x86_64 ABI in Windows requires 16 byte alignment. > https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/build/stack-usage?view=msvc-170 > says: > The stack will always be maintained 16-byte aligned, except > within the prolog (for example, after the return address is pushed), > > Therefore, stack alignment here must be 16n + 8 byte alignment. > Because 'call' instruction pushes the RIP (8 byte) into stack, > while the code > context._CX_instPtr = (ULONG_PTR) pthread::static_cancel_self; > does not do that. > > > But the context Stackptr is the stackpointer of the current function the > > target thread is running in. The instruction pointer is set to > > pthread::static_cancel_self(), which doesn't get any arguments and doesn't > > use any content from the stack. > > Yeah, that was my question. > > > It might be a good idea to make sure the stack is always 16 byte > > aligned, but I don't see why pthread::static_cancel_self() -> > > pthread::cancel_self() -> pthread::exit() would require other than 8 > > byte alignment. > > pthread::exit() calls _cygtls::remove(), and it calls CloseHandle(), > It appears that, from a certain point, CloseHandle() stopped working > unless it was 16n + 8 byte aligned. I confirmed that SbSelectProdedure() does not use 'movaps' instruction in Windows 10 22H2, while it uses 'movaps' in Win 11 25H2. On Tue, 16 Dec 2025 13:11:15 +0000 Jon Turney wrote: > I have the vague idea that this problem started showing up (more?) when > the CI VM was upgraded from Windows Server 2022 to Windows Server 2025, > but I guess that's maybe just timings... I guess the same is true between Windows Server 2022 and Windows Server 2025. > On 14/12/2025 07:39, Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote: > >> I'm not sure why this happens, but it also falis in my local environment. > >> I looked into this issue a bit, and found that access violation happnes > >> in CloseHandle() in _cygtls::remove(). > >> > >> And I am also not sure why at all, cancel2 works if CloseHandle()'s are > >> replaced with NtClose() as follows. > > I think this is just the difference between the two calls: CloseHandle > generates an exception whereas NtClose returns an error code if the > handle is invalid. Perhaps, NtClose() does not use SbSelectProcedure(), then it works on 8 byte alignment by chance. -- Takashi Yano -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple