[compiler-rt][sanitizer] fix msghdr for musl

[deaklajos]

Ran into the issue on Alpine when building with TSAN that __sanitizer_msghdr and the msghdr provided by musl did not match.
This caused lots of tsan reports and an eventual termination of the application by the oom during a sendmsg.

[github-actions]

Thank you for submitting a Pull Request (PR) to the LLVM Project!

This PR will be automatically labeled and the relevant teams will be notified.

If you wish to, you can add reviewers by using the "Reviewers" section on this page.

If this is not working for you, it is probably because you do not have write permissions for the repository. In which case you can instead tag reviewers by name in a comment by using @ followed by their GitHub username.

If you have received no comments on your PR for a week, you can request a review by "ping"ing the PR by adding a comment “Ping”. The common courtesy "ping" rate is once a week. Please remember that you are asking for valuable time from other developers.

If you have further questions, they may be answered by the LLVM GitHub User Guide.

You can also ask questions in a comment on this PR, on the LLVM Discord or on the forums.

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-compiler-rt-sanitizer

Author: Deák Lajos (deaklajos)

Changes

Ran into the issue on Alpine when building with TSAN that __sanitizer_msghdr and the msghdr provided by musl did not match.
This caused lots of tsan reports and an eventual termination of the application by the oom during a sendmsg.

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136195.diff

1 Files Affected:

• (modified) compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.h (+33)

diff --git a/compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.h b/compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.h
index 348bb4f27aec3..899bd22bbd309 100644
--- a/compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.h
+++ b/compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.h
@@ -476,6 +476,39 @@ struct __sanitizer_cmsghdr {
   int cmsg_level;
   int cmsg_type;
 };
+#elif SANITIZER_MUSL
+struct __sanitizer_msghdr {
+  void *msg_name;
+  unsigned msg_namelen;
+  struct __sanitizer_iovec *msg_iov;
+#  if __LONG_MAX > 0x7fffffff && __BYTE_ORDER == __BIG_ENDIAN
+  int __pad1;
+#  endif
+  int msg_iovlen;
+#  if __LONG_MAX > 0x7fffffff && __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
+  int __pad1;
+#  endif
+  void *msg_control;
+#  if __LONG_MAX > 0x7fffffff && __BYTE_ORDER == __BIG_ENDIAN
+  int __pad2;
+#  endif
+  unsigned msg_controllen;
+#  if __LONG_MAX > 0x7fffffff && __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
+  int __pad2;
+#  endif
+  int msg_flags;
+};
+struct __sanitizer_cmsghdr {
+#  if __LONG_MAX > 0x7fffffff && __BYTE_ORDER == __BIG_ENDIAN
+  int __pad1;
+#  endif
+  unsigned cmsg_len;
+#  if __LONG_MAX > 0x7fffffff && __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
+  int __pad1;
+#  endif
+  int cmsg_level;
+  int cmsg_type;
+};
 #else
 // In POSIX, int msg_iovlen; socklen_t msg_controllen; socklen_t cmsg_len; but
 // many implementations don't conform to the standard.

[github-actions]

✅ With the latest revision this PR passed the C/C++ code formatter.

[vitalybuka]

can you use SANITIZER_WORDSIZE == 64 instead of __LONG_MAX ?

[deaklajos]

Done

[deaklajos]

ping @vitalybuka

[deaklajos]

ping @vitalybuka

[github-actions]

@deaklajos Congratulations on having your first Pull Request (PR) merged into the LLVM Project!

Your changes will be combined with recent changes from other authors, then tested by our build bots. If there is a problem with a build, you may receive a report in an email or a comment on this PR.

Please check whether problems have been caused by your change specifically, as the builds can include changes from many authors. It is not uncommon for your change to be included in a build that fails due to someone else's changes, or infrastructure issues.

How to do this, and the rest of the post-merge process, is covered in detail here.

If your change does cause a problem, it may be reverted, or you can revert it yourself. This is a normal part of LLVM development. You can fix your changes and open a new PR to merge them again.

If you don't get any reports, no action is required from you. Your changes are working as expected, well done!

[stefson]

can you please be so kind to backport this to the 21.x branch, if it sticks to main?