runtime: android x86 support #9327
Comments
|
In the meantime, it would be useful to note in the docs that "gomobile install" will only work if you have either real hardware, or an ARM-based AVD. You can download the arm AVD with Android Studio and use it instead of the default x86 one. |
|
One obvious missing feature is the TLS handling - linux/386 assumes availability of TLS store to hold g across cgo calls, and the linker's ability to handle TLS relocation for LE mode. But android linker lacks such support. Android/arm overcomes it by emulating runtime.tlsg as a regular variable. The same trick doesn't seem to work for 386 where the offset is encoded in the instruction when using LE model. Instead, @crawshaw and I think the approach darwin/386 is taking (runtime/cgo/gcc_darwin_386.c) may work for android/386 as well - basically we allocate a thread-local storage with a specific key and use a hard-coded offset (cmd/link/internal/ld/sym.go line 145). This is ugly and fragile, but seems promising. Should we take this path? In this mail thread https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/golang-nuts/cZPdxDmnuUM @mwhudson mentioned it may be feasible through IE model support and I guess it may be cleaner. However, not being familiar with the concept yet, I cannot estimate how much work is necessary to implement IE model support (pointer to the cl that implements IE mode for amd64 would be appreciated) and not yet clear about where to hook into the tls offset info when the linker is not doing most of the magic for me. |
|
It's probably not that hard to implement IE model for 386 -- i'll need to do it for shared libraries on 386 anyway (a task I keep subconsciously trying to forget!). I don't think this part is much harder than for amd64 (at least, once we handle PIC :/). |
|
https://go-review.googlesource.com/#/c/13760/ adds some missing defines that I encountered while trying to build the std-lib for. android x86. Another problem is that both src/runtime/cgo/gcc_386.S (from Go) and usr/lib/crtbegin_dynamic.o (from the NDK) define |
|
CL https://golang.org/cl/13615 mentions this issue. |
I cannot find where it's being used. This addresses a duplicate symbol issue encountered in #9327. Change-Id: I8efda45a006ad3e19423748210c78bd5831215e0 Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/13615 Reviewed-by: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@golang.org>
|
No, there's nothing in that that really changes anything on 386. On 8 October 2015 at 22:32, timcooijmans notifications@github.com wrote:
|
|
Is this really Go 1.6? If so it needs to be done very soon. Otherwise it should be moved to the Unplanned milestone. Thanks. |
|
I just flushed out a couple of CLs to update this issue but couldn't make the c-shared build mode working yet. Probably I should drop this out of go1.6 milestone. |
|
CL https://golang.org/cl/16678 mentions this issue. |
|
CL https://golang.org/cl/16700 mentions this issue. |
|
CL https://golang.org/cl/16679 mentions this issue. |
|
it turned out enabling c-shared was just changing a couple of conditions in flag setting. (cl sent out) |
|
CL https://golang.org/cl/16701 mentions this issue. |
Same ugly hack as https://go-review.googlesource.com/15991. Update #9327. Change-Id: I58284e83268a15de95eabc833c3e01bf1e3faa2e Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/16678 Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
Update golang#9327. Change-Id: I27ef973190d9ae652411caf3739414b5d46ca7d2 Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/16679 Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
|
since this depends on shared linking, this will drop as part as go 1.6 ? |
no buildmode=c-shared yet. Update #9327. Change-Id: I9989d954d574807bac105da401c3463607fe8a99 Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/16700 Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
|
as of rev 431c232, android/386 is broken. Breakpoint 4, runtime.asmcgocall ()
at /usr/local/google/home/hakim/golang/goroots/386/go/src/runtime/asm_386.s:549
549 MOVL BX, 0(SP) // first argument in x86-32 ABI
(gdb) info reg
eax 0xb775ac70 -1217024912
ecx 0xb77385ac -1217165908
edx 0xbfdcd554 -1076046508
ebx 0xbfdcd578 -1076046472
esp 0xbfdcd530 0xbfdcd530
ebp 0xb77a8e40 0xb77a8e40
esi 0xb77a8c40 -1216705472
edi 0x5c 92
eip 0xb7758ae4 0xb7758ae4
eflags 0x216 [ PF AF IF ]
cs 0x73 115
ss 0x7b 123
ds 0x7b 123
es 0x7b 123
fs 0x0 0
gs 0x33 51
(gdb) next
550 CALL AX
(gdb) next
Program terminated with signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
(gdb) info symbol 0xb775ac70
x_cgo_thread_start in section .text of /tmp/trivial
|
|
I'm sorry I broke this :( It seems implausible that that CALL AX instruction is the one faulting. For debugging this sort of thing I find the "layout regs" mode of gdb invaluable, and using the si/ni comands to go by one instruction at a time. I'll try to set up the emulator and reproduce this myself, but that's probably going to take a while (I'm also on leave tomorrow). |
|
@hyangah Just to exclude the (unlikely) possibility that the new parser is screwing things up: Can you run the compiler with the -oldparser flag and see if the problem persists? (e.g. go build -gcflags=-oldparser ). |
|
@griesemer I don't think any Go code has been executed by this point :-) |
|
@griesemer Thanks! I found this breakage after cherrypicking cl/17012, so I don't think that's related. It failed consistently in pthread_create call in _cgo_sys_thread_start (runtime/cgo/gcc_linux_386.c). But seeing it failing while calling _thread_created_hook of pthread_create (I guess it's line 380 of http://osxr.org/android/source/bionic/libc/bionic/pthread.c or equivalent), I am getting skeptical about relying on gdb. :-( |
|
Thanks for your testing guide, I got it working, although gdb doesn't seem to want to play, it says: when I try to do anything. But at least I can reproduce the problem. Are you really truly sure that it's that revision though? I think 3bf61fb is much more likely. |
|
Well 3bf61fb fails and the revision before succeeds, so yeah, think it's that (which makes more sense). Back after the weekend. |
|
oh, sorry for my initial incorrect report. |
|
I couldn't stop thinking about this and pushed a simple fix up for review. |
|
I haven't run tests, but a trivial executable runs (and doesn't print warnings about text relocations, woo!) |
|
CL https://golang.org/cl/17049 mentions this issue. |
…/386 golang.org/cl/16383 broke android/386 because by a sort of confluence of hacks no TLS relocations were emitted at all when Flag_shared != 0. The hack in runtime/cgo works as well in a PIE executable as it does with a position dependent one, so the simplest fix is to still emit a R_TLS_LE reloc when goos == "android". A real fix is to use something more like the IE model code but loading the offset from %gs to the thread local storage from a global variable rather than from a location chosen by the system linker (this is how android/arm works). Issue #9327. Change-Id: I9fbfc890ec7fe191f80a595b6cf8e2a1fcbe3034 Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/17049 Reviewed-by: Hyang-Ah Hana Kim <hyangah@gmail.com>
Update #9327. Change-Id: Iab7dad31cf6b9f9347c3f34faebb67ecb38b17fc Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/16701 Run-TryBot: Hyang-Ah Hana Kim <hyangah@gmail.com> TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org> Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
|
builder is up. |
…/386 golang.org/cl/16383 broke android/386 because by a sort of confluence of hacks no TLS relocations were emitted at all when Flag_shared != 0. The hack in runtime/cgo works as well in a PIE executable as it does with a position dependent one, so the simplest fix is to still emit a R_TLS_LE reloc when goos == "android". A real fix is to use something more like the IE model code but loading the offset from %gs to the thread local storage from a global variable rather than from a location chosen by the system linker (this is how android/arm works). Issue golang#9327. Change-Id: I9fbfc890ec7fe191f80a595b6cf8e2a1fcbe3034
no buildmode=c-shared yet. Update golang/go#9327. Change-Id: I9989d954d574807bac105da401c3463607fe8a99 Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/16700 Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
Update golang/go#9327. Change-Id: Iab7dad31cf6b9f9347c3f34faebb67ecb38b17fc Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/16701 Run-TryBot: Hyang-Ah Hana Kim <hyangah@gmail.com> TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org> Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
Tracking bug. There are a handful of x86 android devices in the wild, but what makes this target interesting is the Android Emulator. By far the best emulator uses Intel's HAXM kernel plugin to run android via hardware-assisted virtualization.
It also makes it possible to setup an android builder as two docker images (build host and android client) which would be much easier for other's to bring up and maintain.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: