openldap-bugs June 2019

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

27 participants
104 discussions

Re: (ITS#8962) Dead links in FAQ page "Where can I find listings of schema items?"
by quanah＠symas.com 07 Jun '19

07 Jun '19

--On Friday, June 07, 2019 8:53 AM +0200 Michael Str=C3=B6der=20 <michael(a)stroeder.com> wrote: > The FAQ contains the only documentation for set-based ACLs. > > So it's not an option to just shutdown FAQ-O-MATIC. Sure, any useful articles need to get moved to something. Just saying=20 overall, I think it's time for the existing FAQ to die. --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Product Architect Symas Corporation Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: <http://www.symas.com>

1 0

Re: (ITS#8988) Undefined Behavior in slapadd
by noloader＠gmail.com 07 Jun '19

07 Jun '19

On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 9:59 AM Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> wrote: > > noloader(a)gmail.com wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 9:32 AM Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> wrote: > >> > >> noloader(a)gmail.com wrote: > >> ... > >>> I encourage OpenLDAP to fix the undefined behavior. OpenLDAP is an > >>> important project, and the undefined behavior is causing too many > >>> tangential problems. > >> > >> Undefined behavior is not a bug, nor is it prohibited by the C spec. It is a necessary > >> part of the language for its intended use as a system programming language, writing > >> machine-specific programs. Anyone who says it is prohibited by the spec is wrong. > > > > I don't believe this is correct. > > > > Maybe you are thinking of implementation defined behavior? > > That would apply to how a particular compiler implementation treats some piece of code. > Whether a CPU supports unaligned access is machine-defined. Since our code is already > properly ifdef'd for the machines which do or don't support it, the fact that this is > "non-portable" is not an issue. The undefined behavior is causing OpenLDAP to fail testing. Worse, it is causing test failures in programs and libraries which use OpenLDAP. The OpenLDAP bugs have cross-pollinated into other programs and libraries. It is not simply contained or limited to OpenLDAP. That's a big problem for testing a QA folks. Jeff

1 0

Re: (ITS#8988) Undefined Behavior in slapadd
by hyc＠symas.com 07 Jun '19

07 Jun '19

noloader(a)gmail.com wrote: > On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 9:32 AM Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> wrote: >> >> noloader(a)gmail.com wrote: >> ... >>> I encourage OpenLDAP to fix the undefined behavior. OpenLDAP is an >>> important project, and the undefined behavior is causing too many >>> tangential problems. >> >> Undefined behavior is not a bug, nor is it prohibited by the C spec. It is a necessary >> part of the language for its intended use as a system programming language, writing >> machine-specific programs. Anyone who says it is prohibited by the spec is wrong. > > I don't believe this is correct. > > Maybe you are thinking of implementation defined behavior? That would apply to how a particular compiler implementation treats some piece of code. Whether a CPU supports unaligned access is machine-defined. Since our code is already properly ifdef'd for the machines which do or don't support it, the fact that this is "non-portable" is not an issue. -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/

1 0

Re: (ITS#8988) Undefined Behavior in slapadd
by noloader＠gmail.com 07 Jun '19

07 Jun '19

On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 9:32 AM Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> wrote: > > noloader(a)gmail.com wrote: > ... > > I encourage OpenLDAP to fix the undefined behavior. OpenLDAP is an > > important project, and the undefined behavior is causing too many > > tangential problems. > > Undefined behavior is not a bug, nor is it prohibited by the C spec. It is a necessary > part of the language for its intended use as a system programming language, writing > machine-specific programs. Anyone who says it is prohibited by the spec is wrong. I don't believe this is correct. Maybe you are thinking of implementation defined behavior? Jeff

1 0

Re: (ITS#8988) Undefined Behavior in slapadd
by hyc＠symas.com 07 Jun '19

07 Jun '19

noloader(a)gmail.com wrote: > On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 7:39 PM Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)symas.com> wrote: >> >> --On Thursday, March 07, 2019 10:10 AM +0000 noloader(a)gmail.com wrote: >> >>> Full_Name: JW >>> Version: 2.4.47 >>> OS: Linux (Fedora 29, x86_64, fully patched) >>> URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ >>> Submission from: (NULL) (151.196.22.177) >>> >>> I added -fsanitize=undefined to CFLAGS. >> >> In this case, the compiler is the problem. > > I'm pretty sure the compiler is correct. > > The instrumentation does not produce false positives. It operates on > real data and simply does not produce false positives. > >> LMDB is 100% correct regarding >> alignment on all supported CPUs (which is most of them). The x86 family >> fully supports unaligned access, so LMDB makes use of this. > > It is not the processor; it is the C language. The C language does not allow it. That is incorrect. The C language allows it, but does not fully specify the behavior. On some machines unaligned accesses are allowed, on others it is not. On X86 family it is allowed, and we use it. > >> On other CPUs, >> which do not support unaligned access (e.g., SPARC), LMDB doesn't use them. > > The undefined behavior exists even after disabling the unaligned > accesses with custom patches. For example, there is still undefined > behavior even after changes like this: > > -#if defined(__i386) || defined(__x86_64) > -#define MISALIGNED_OK 1 > -#else > #define ALIGNER (sizeof(size_t)-1) > -#endif > > We also fixed COPY_PGNO but the undefined behavior remained. > > The GCC Compile Farm (https://cfarm.tetaneutral.net/machines/list/) > has three SPARC machines. SPARC does not tolerate unaligned accesses > well, especially due to the optimized 64-bit move instruction. We have already tested on SPARC and as we already noted above, we do not use unaligned accesses on SPARC. > OpenLDAP might consider testing on the SPARC machines. > > In the bigger picture, OpenLDAP is causing other program and library > testing to fail testing. When we test other programs and libraries > that depend upon OpenLDAP in a similar fashion, the undefined behavior > in OpenLDAP surfaces in the other program and libraries. It is making > a lot of extra work for folks who perform extra testing. > > I encourage OpenLDAP to fix the undefined behavior. OpenLDAP is an > important project, and the undefined behavior is causing too many > tangential problems. Undefined behavior is not a bug, nor is it prohibited by the C spec. It is a necessary part of the language for its intended use as a system programming language, writing machine-specific programs. Anyone who says it is prohibited by the spec is wrong. > Jeff > > > > -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/

1 0

Re: (ITS#8962) Dead links in FAQ page "Where can I find listings of schema items?"
by michael＠stroeder.com 06 Jun '19

06 Jun '19

On 6/7/19 1:49 AM, quanah(a)symas.com wrote: > --On Friday, January 25, 2019 9:25 PM +0000 michael(a)stroeder.com wrote: > >> All links herein are dead: >> https://www.openldap.org/faq/data/cache/220.html >> >> I'd suggest to remove this FAQ page completely. > > I tried, but unfortunatley the FAQ software breaks Apache when you try and > delete an answer. I think the better solution is just to remove the FAQ > software completely. The FAQ contains the only documentation for set-based ACLs. So it's not an option to just shutdown FAQ-O-MATIC. Ciao, Michael.

1 0

Re: (ITS#8988) Undefined Behavior in slapadd
by noloader＠gmail.com 06 Jun '19

06 Jun '19

On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 7:39 PM Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)symas.com> wrote: > > --On Thursday, March 07, 2019 10:10 AM +0000 noloader(a)gmail.com wrote: > > > Full_Name: JW > > Version: 2.4.47 > > OS: Linux (Fedora 29, x86_64, fully patched) > > URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ > > Submission from: (NULL) (151.196.22.177) > > > > I added -fsanitize=undefined to CFLAGS. > > In this case, the compiler is the problem. I'm pretty sure the compiler is correct. The instrumentation does not produce false positives. It operates on real data and simply does not produce false positives. > LMDB is 100% correct regarding > alignment on all supported CPUs (which is most of them). The x86 family > fully supports unaligned access, so LMDB makes use of this. It is not the processor; it is the C language. The C language does not allow it. > On other CPUs, > which do not support unaligned access (e.g., SPARC), LMDB doesn't use them. The undefined behavior exists even after disabling the unaligned accesses with custom patches. For example, there is still undefined behavior even after changes like this: -#if defined(__i386) || defined(__x86_64) -#define MISALIGNED_OK 1 -#else #define ALIGNER (sizeof(size_t)-1) -#endif We also fixed COPY_PGNO but the undefined behavior remained. The GCC Compile Farm (https://cfarm.tetaneutral.net/machines/list/) has three SPARC machines. SPARC does not tolerate unaligned accesses well, especially due to the optimized 64-bit move instruction. OpenLDAP might consider testing on the SPARC machines. In the bigger picture, OpenLDAP is causing other program and library testing to fail testing. When we test other programs and libraries that depend upon OpenLDAP in a similar fashion, the undefined behavior in OpenLDAP surfaces in the other program and libraries. It is making a lot of extra work for folks who perform extra testing. I encourage OpenLDAP to fix the undefined behavior. OpenLDAP is an important project, and the undefined behavior is causing too many tangential problems. Jeff

1 0

Re: (ITS#8946) openldap bug
by quanah＠symas.com 06 Jun '19

06 Jun '19

Hello, There is no bug here. Your configuration is invalid. If you need help with configuring OpenLDAP, then please use the openldap-technical(a)openldap.org mailing list. Regards, Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Product Architect Symas Corporation Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: <http://www.symas.com>

1 0

Re: (ITS#8962) Dead links in FAQ page "Where can I find listings of schema items?"
by quanah＠symas.com 06 Jun '19

06 Jun '19

--On Friday, January 25, 2019 9:25 PM +0000 michael(a)stroeder.com wrote: > All links herein are dead: > https://www.openldap.org/faq/data/cache/220.html > > I'd suggest to remove this FAQ page completely. I tried, but unfortunatley the FAQ software breaks Apache when you try and delete an answer. I think the better solution is just to remove the FAQ software completely. --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Product Architect Symas Corporation Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: <http://www.symas.com>

1 0

Re: (ITS#8988) Undefined Behavior in slapadd
by quanah＠symas.com 06 Jun '19

06 Jun '19

--On Thursday, March 07, 2019 10:10 AM +0000 noloader(a)gmail.com wrote: > Full_Name: JW > Version: 2.4.47 > OS: Linux (Fedora 29, x86_64, fully patched) > URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ > Submission from: (NULL) (151.196.22.177) > > > I added -fsanitize=undefined to CFLAGS. Hello, In this case, the compiler is the problem. LMDB is 100% correct regarding alignment on all supported CPUs (which is most of them). The x86 family fully supports unaligned access, so LMDB makes use of this. On other CPUs, which do not support unaligned access (e.g., SPARC), LMDB doesn't use them. This ITS will be closed. --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Product Architect Symas Corporation Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: <http://www.symas.com>

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs June 2019