From a07f9d2f82598d2f5cc0df0e813a6a2309cb96e6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michael Pratt <mpratt@google.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2021 12:28:45 -0500
Subject: [PATCH 32/44] [release-branch.go1.15] runtime: non-strict
 InlTreeIndex lookup in Frames.Next

When using cgo, some of the frames can be provided by cgoTraceback, a
cgo-provided function to generate C tracebacks. Unlike Go tracebacks,
cgoTraceback has no particular guarantees that it produces valid
tracebacks.

If one of the (invalid) frames happens to put the PC in the alignment
region at the end of a function (filled with int 3's on amd64), then
Frames.Next will find a valid funcInfo for the PC, but pcdatavalue will
panic because PCDATA doesn't cover this PC.

Tolerate this case by doing a non-strict PCDATA lookup. We'll still show
a bogus frame, but at least avoid throwing.

For #44971
Fixes #45302

Change-Id: I9eed728470d6f264179a7615bd19845c941db78c
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/301369
Trust: Michael Pratt <mpratt@google.com>
Run-TryBot: Michael Pratt <mpratt@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Go Bot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
(cherry picked from commit e4a4161f1f3157550846e1b6bd4fe83aae15778e)
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/305890

Conflict:NA
Reference:https://github.com/golang/go/commit/a07f9d2f82598d2f5cc0df0e813a6a2309cb96e6

---
 src/runtime/symtab.go      |  4 +-
 src/runtime/symtab_test.go | 85 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/runtime/symtab.go b/src/runtime/symtab.go
index 1e86662adc..c77d513e74 100644
--- a/src/runtime/symtab.go
+++ b/src/runtime/symtab.go
@@ -102,7 +102,9 @@ func (ci *Frames) Next() (frame Frame, more bool) {
 		name := funcname(funcInfo)
 		if inldata := funcdata(funcInfo, _FUNCDATA_InlTree); inldata != nil {
 			inltree := (*[1 << 20]inlinedCall)(inldata)
-			ix := pcdatavalue(funcInfo, _PCDATA_InlTreeIndex, pc, nil)
+			// Non-strict as cgoTraceback may have added bogus PCs
+			// with a valid funcInfo but invalid PCDATA.
+			ix := pcdatavalue1(funcInfo, _PCDATA_InlTreeIndex, pc, nil, false)
 			if ix >= 0 {
 				// Note: entry is not modified. It always refers to a real frame, not an inlined one.
 				f = nil
diff --git a/src/runtime/symtab_test.go b/src/runtime/symtab_test.go
index 01e5002659..ffa07c7f3a 100644
--- a/src/runtime/symtab_test.go
+++ b/src/runtime/symtab_test.go
@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ import (
 	"runtime"
 	"strings"
 	"testing"
+	"unsafe"
 )
 
 func TestCaller(t *testing.T) {
@@ -165,3 +166,87 @@ func TestNilName(t *testing.T) {
 		t.Errorf("Name() = %q, want %q", got, "")
 	}
 }
+
+var dummy int
+
+func inlined() {
+	// Side effect to prevent elimination of this entire function.
+	dummy = 42
+}
+
+// A function with an InlTree. Returns a PC within the function body.
+//
+// No inline to ensure this complete function appears in output.
+//
+//go:noinline
+func tracebackFunc(t *testing.T) uintptr {
+	// This body must be more complex than a single call to inlined to get
+	// an inline tree.
+	inlined()
+	inlined()
+
+	// Acquire a PC in this function.
+	pc, _, _, ok := runtime.Caller(0)
+	if !ok {
+		t.Fatalf("Caller(0) got ok false, want true")
+	}
+
+	return pc
+}
+
+// Test that CallersFrames handles PCs in the alignment region between
+// functions (int 3 on amd64) without crashing.
+//
+// Go will never generate a stack trace containing such an address, as it is
+// not a valid call site. However, the cgo traceback function passed to
+// runtime.SetCgoTraceback may not be completely accurate and may incorrect
+// provide PCs in Go code or the alignement region between functions.
+//
+// Go obviously doesn't easily expose the problematic PCs to running programs,
+// so this test is a bit fragile. Some details:
+//
+// * tracebackFunc is our target function. We want to get a PC in the
+//   alignment region following this function. This function also has other
+//   functions inlined into it to ensure it has an InlTree (this was the source
+//   of the bug in issue 44971).
+//
+// * We acquire a PC in tracebackFunc, walking forwards until FuncForPC says
+//   we're in a new function. The last PC of the function according to FuncForPC
+//   should be in the alignment region (assuming the function isn't already
+//   perfectly aligned).
+//
+// This is a regression test for issue 44971.
+func TestFunctionAlignmentTraceback(t *testing.T) {
+	pc := tracebackFunc(t)
+
+	// Double-check we got the right PC.
+	f := runtime.FuncForPC(pc)
+	if !strings.HasSuffix(f.Name(), "tracebackFunc") {
+		t.Fatalf("Caller(0) = %+v, want tracebackFunc", f)
+	}
+
+	// Iterate forward until we find a different function. Back up one
+	// instruction is (hopefully) an alignment instruction.
+	for runtime.FuncForPC(pc) == f {
+		pc++
+	}
+	pc--
+
+	// Is this an alignment region filler instruction? We only check this
+	// on amd64 for simplicity. If this function has no filler, then we may
+	// get a false negative, but will never get a false positive.
+	if runtime.GOARCH == "amd64" {
+		code := *(*uint8)(unsafe.Pointer(pc))
+		if code != 0xcc { // INT $3
+			t.Errorf("PC %v code got %#x want 0xcc", pc, code)
+		}
+	}
+
+	// Finally ensure that Frames.Next doesn't crash when processing this
+	// PC.
+	frames := runtime.CallersFrames([]uintptr{pc})
+	frame, _ := frames.Next()
+	if frame.Func != f {
+		t.Errorf("frames.Next() got %+v want %+v", frame.Func, f)
+	}
+}
-- 
2.27.0

