* [PATCH, V2] gas: gcfg: fix handling of non-local direct jmps in gcfg
@ 2024-03-28 7:59 Indu Bhagat
2024-03-28 10:10 ` Jan Beulich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Indu Bhagat @ 2024-03-28 7:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: binutils; +Cc: Indu Bhagat
[Changes in V2]
- Add function level comments for ginsn_direct_local_jump_p.
- Add a jmp to locally defined label in the testcase to make it more
complete. Also, add a jmp to label defined in another function.
The testcase now generates an additional warning (as expected):
"Warning: GINSN: found unreachable code in func 'bar'"
- Use formatting style consistent with other testcases.
[End of changes in V2]
The ginsn infrastructure in GAS includes the ability to create a GCFG
(ginsn CFG). A GCFG is currently used for SCFI passes.
This patch fixes the following invalid assumptions / code blocks:
- The function ginsn_direct_local_jump_p () was erroneously _not_
checking whether the symbol is locally defined (i.e., within the
scope of the code block for which GCFG is desired). Fix the code
to do so.
- Similarly, the GCFG creation code, in gcfg_build () itself had an
assumption that a GINSN_TYPE_JUMP to a non-local symbol will not be
seen. The latter can indeed be seen, and in fact, needs to be treated
the same way as an exit from the function in terms of control-flow.
gas/
* ginsn.c (ginsn_direct_local_jump_p): Check if the symbol
is local to the code block or function being assembled.
(add_bb_at_ginsn): Remove buggy assumption.
(frch_ginsn_data_append): Direct jmps do not disqualify a stream
of ginsns from GCFG creation.
gas/testsuite/
* gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.d: New test.
* gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.l: New test.
* gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.s: New test.
* gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-x86-64.exp: Add new test.
gas: gcfg: address review comments for local jump issue
ChangeLog:
* gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.d
* gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.l
* gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.s
---
gas/ginsn.c | 47 +++++++++++--------
gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.d | 32 +++++++++++++
gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.l | 3 ++
gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.s | 43 +++++++++++++++++
gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-x86-64.exp | 2 +
5 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.d
create mode 100644 gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.l
create mode 100644 gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.s
diff --git a/gas/ginsn.c b/gas/ginsn.c
index 661f51d23c5..492e161876b 100644
--- a/gas/ginsn.c
+++ b/gas/ginsn.c
@@ -444,16 +444,26 @@ ginsn_indirect_jump_p (ginsnS *ginsn)
return ret_p;
}
+/* Return whether the GINSN is an unconditional jump to a label which is
+ defined locally in the scope of the block of insns, which are currently
+ being processed for GCFG creation. */
+
static bool
ginsn_direct_local_jump_p (ginsnS *ginsn)
{
- bool ret_p = false;
+ bool local_p = false;
+ const symbolS *taken_label;
+
if (!ginsn)
- return ret_p;
+ return local_p;
- ret_p |= (ginsn->type == GINSN_TYPE_JUMP
- && ginsn->src[0].type == GINSN_SRC_SYMBOL);
- return ret_p;
+ if (ginsn->type == GINSN_TYPE_JUMP
+ && ginsn->src[0].type == GINSN_SRC_SYMBOL)
+ {
+ taken_label = ginsn->src[0].sym;
+ local_p = (label_ginsn_map_find (taken_label) != NULL);
+ }
+ return local_p;
}
static char *
@@ -785,16 +795,13 @@ add_bb_at_ginsn (const symbolS *func, gcfgS *gcfg, ginsnS *ginsn, gbbS *prev_bb,
|| ginsn->type == GINSN_TYPE_JUMP_COND
|| ginsn->type == GINSN_TYPE_RETURN)
{
- /* Indirect Jumps or direct jumps to symbols non-local to the
- function must not be seen here. The caller must have already
- checked for that. */
+ /* Indirect jumps must not be seen here. The caller must have
+ already checked for that. */
gas_assert (!ginsn_indirect_jump_p (ginsn));
- if (ginsn->type == GINSN_TYPE_JUMP)
- gas_assert (ginsn_direct_local_jump_p (ginsn));
- /* Direct Jumps. May include conditional or unconditional change of
- flow. What is important for CFG creation is that the target be
- local to function. */
+ /* Handle direct jumps. For unconditional direct jumps, where the
+ target is not local to the function, treat them later as similar
+ to an exit from function (in the else block). */
if (ginsn->type == GINSN_TYPE_JUMP_COND
|| ginsn_direct_local_jump_p (ginsn))
{
@@ -822,10 +829,14 @@ add_bb_at_ginsn (const symbolS *func, gcfgS *gcfg, ginsnS *ginsn, gbbS *prev_bb,
/* Add the bb for the fall through path. */
find_or_make_bb (func, gcfg, ginsn->next, prev_bb, errp);
}
- else if (ginsn->type == GINSN_TYPE_RETURN)
+ else
{
- /* We'll come back to the ginsns following GINSN_TYPE_RETURN
- from another path if they are indeed reachable code. */
+ gas_assert (ginsn->type == GINSN_TYPE_RETURN
+ || (ginsn->type == GINSN_TYPE_JUMP
+ && !ginsn_direct_local_jump_p (ginsn)));
+ /* We'll come back to the ginsns following GINSN_TYPE_RETURN or
+ other (non-local) unconditional jmps from another path if they
+ are indeed reachable code. */
break;
}
@@ -1083,9 +1094,7 @@ frch_ginsn_data_append (ginsnS *ginsn)
{
temp->id = ++id;
- if (ginsn_indirect_jump_p (temp)
- || (ginsn->type == GINSN_TYPE_JUMP
- && !ginsn_direct_local_jump_p (temp)))
+ if (ginsn_indirect_jump_p (temp))
frchain_now->frch_ginsn_data->gcfg_apt_p = false;
if (listing & LISTING_GINSN_SCFI)
diff --git a/gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.d b/gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.d
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..dfc2782d1b9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.d
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+#as: --scfi=experimental -W
+#as:
+#objdump: -Wf
+#name: Synthesize CFI in presence of control flow 3
+#...
+Contents of the .eh_frame section:
+
+00000000 0+0014 0+0000 CIE
+ Version: 1
+ Augmentation: "zR"
+ Code alignment factor: 1
+ Data alignment factor: -8
+ Return address column: 16
+ Augmentation data: 1b
+ DW_CFA_def_cfa: r7 \(rsp\) ofs 8
+ DW_CFA_offset: r16 \(rip\) at cfa-8
+ DW_CFA_nop
+ DW_CFA_nop
+
+0+0018 0+0010 0+001c FDE cie=00000000 pc=0+0000..0+001e
+ DW_CFA_nop
+#...
+
+0+002c 0+0018 0+0030 FDE cie=00000000 pc=0+001e..0+002b
+ DW_CFA_advance_loc: 1 to 0+001f
+ DW_CFA_def_cfa_offset: 16
+ DW_CFA_offset: r6 \(rbp\) at cfa-16
+ DW_CFA_advance_loc: 3 to 0+0022
+ DW_CFA_def_cfa_register: r6 \(rbp\)
+ DW_CFA_nop
+
+#pass
diff --git a/gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.l b/gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.l
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..eda60a41fef
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.l
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+.*Assembler messages:
+.*9: Warning: SCFI ignores most user-specified CFI directives
+.*40: Warning: GINSN: found unreachable code in func 'bar'
diff --git a/gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.s b/gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.s
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..89ae29f37df
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.s
@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+# Testcase with jmp to function instead of a call.
+# Also includes a jmp to label locally defined.
+# The CFG creation process is not expected to warn about
+# missing foo_handler_v1 or xstrdup.
+ .text
+ .globl foo_handler
+ .type foo_handler, @function
+foo_handler:
+ .cfi_startproc
+ movl current_style(%rip), %eax
+ jmp .L2
+.L2:
+ cmpl $-1, %eax
+ je .L5
+ testb $4, %al
+ je .L3
+ jmp foo_handler_v1
+.L3:
+ xorl %eax, %eax
+ ret
+.L5:
+ jmp xstrdup
+ .cfi_endproc
+ .size foo_handler, .-foo_handler
+
+# New function with unconditional jump to a label previously defined
+# in a different function. For SCFI purposes, since .L2 in not found
+# when processing bar, a warning is issued.
+ .globl bar
+ .type bar, @function
+bar:
+ .cfi_startproc
+ pushq %rbp
+ .cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
+ .cfi_offset %rbp, -16
+ movq %rsp, %rbp
+ .cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
+ movl $0, %eax
+ jmp .L2
+ popq %rbp
+ ret
+ .cfi_endproc
+ .size bar, .-bar
diff --git a/gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-x86-64.exp b/gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-x86-64.exp
index 5324af386f8..c004d99b4ac 100644
--- a/gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-x86-64.exp
+++ b/gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-x86-64.exp
@@ -78,6 +78,8 @@ if { ([istarget "x86_64-*-*"] && ![istarget "x86_64-*-linux*-gnux32"]) } then {
run_list_test "scfi-cfg-1" "--scfi=experimental --warn"
run_dump_test "scfi-cfg-2"
run_list_test "scfi-cfg-2" "--scfi=experimental --warn"
+ run_dump_test "scfi-cfg-3"
+ run_list_test "scfi-cfg-3" "--scfi=experimental --warn"
run_dump_test "scfi-asm-marker-1"
run_list_test "scfi-asm-marker-1" "--scfi=experimental --warn"
run_dump_test "scfi-asm-marker-2"
--
2.43.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, V2] gas: gcfg: fix handling of non-local direct jmps in gcfg
2024-03-28 7:59 [PATCH, V2] gas: gcfg: fix handling of non-local direct jmps in gcfg Indu Bhagat
@ 2024-03-28 10:10 ` Jan Beulich
2024-03-28 16:26 ` Indu Bhagat
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2024-03-28 10:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Indu Bhagat; +Cc: binutils
On 28.03.2024 08:59, Indu Bhagat wrote:
> [Changes in V2]
> - Add function level comments for ginsn_direct_local_jump_p.
> - Add a jmp to locally defined label in the testcase to make it more
> complete. Also, add a jmp to label defined in another function.
> The testcase now generates an additional warning (as expected):
> "Warning: GINSN: found unreachable code in func 'bar'"
For this - can't you simply omit the unreachable pair of insns?
Other than that, looks plausible, so feel free to put in.
> - Use formatting style consistent with other testcases.
> [End of changes in V2]
As a minor remark, this entire section would better go ...
> The ginsn infrastructure in GAS includes the ability to create a GCFG
> (ginsn CFG). A GCFG is currently used for SCFI passes.
>
> This patch fixes the following invalid assumptions / code blocks:
> - The function ginsn_direct_local_jump_p () was erroneously _not_
> checking whether the symbol is locally defined (i.e., within the
> scope of the code block for which GCFG is desired). Fix the code
> to do so.
> - Similarly, the GCFG creation code, in gcfg_build () itself had an
> assumption that a GINSN_TYPE_JUMP to a non-local symbol will not be
> seen. The latter can indeed be seen, and in fact, needs to be treated
> the same way as an exit from the function in terms of control-flow.
>
> gas/
> * ginsn.c (ginsn_direct_local_jump_p): Check if the symbol
> is local to the code block or function being assembled.
> (add_bb_at_ginsn): Remove buggy assumption.
> (frch_ginsn_data_append): Direct jmps do not disqualify a stream
> of ginsns from GCFG creation.
>
> gas/testsuite/
> * gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.d: New test.
> * gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.l: New test.
> * gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.s: New test.
> * gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-x86-64.exp: Add new test.
>
> gas: gcfg: address review comments for local jump issue
>
> ChangeLog:
> * gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.d
> * gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.l
> * gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.s
> ---
> gas/ginsn.c | 47 +++++++++++--------
> gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.d | 32 +++++++++++++
> gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.l | 3 ++
> gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.s | 43 +++++++++++++++++
> gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-x86-64.exp | 2 +
> 5 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.d
> create mode 100644 gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.l
> create mode 100644 gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.s
... below here, perhaps with another --- separator. This way it's clear
that the revlog isn't going to be part of the commit message.
Jan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, V2] gas: gcfg: fix handling of non-local direct jmps in gcfg
2024-03-28 10:10 ` Jan Beulich
@ 2024-03-28 16:26 ` Indu Bhagat
2024-03-28 16:35 ` Jan Beulich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Indu Bhagat @ 2024-03-28 16:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Beulich; +Cc: binutils
On 3/28/24 03:10, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 28.03.2024 08:59, Indu Bhagat wrote:
>> [Changes in V2]
>> - Add function level comments for ginsn_direct_local_jump_p.
>> - Add a jmp to locally defined label in the testcase to make it more
>> complete. Also, add a jmp to label defined in another function.
>> The testcase now generates an additional warning (as expected):
>> "Warning: GINSN: found unreachable code in func 'bar'"
>
> For this - can't you simply omit the unreachable pair of insns?
>
We do omit those instructions from GCFG and SCFI. GAS does, however,
warn for now. Do you mean skip this warning too?
> Other than that, looks plausible, so feel free to put in.
>
>> - Use formatting style consistent with other testcases.
>> [End of changes in V2]
>
> As a minor remark, this entire section would better go ...
>
Yes, I usually get rid of this before committing. But I agree, its
better put below after the separator.
>> The ginsn infrastructure in GAS includes the ability to create a GCFG
>> (ginsn CFG). A GCFG is currently used for SCFI passes.
>>
>> This patch fixes the following invalid assumptions / code blocks:
>> - The function ginsn_direct_local_jump_p () was erroneously _not_
>> checking whether the symbol is locally defined (i.e., within the
>> scope of the code block for which GCFG is desired). Fix the code
>> to do so.
>> - Similarly, the GCFG creation code, in gcfg_build () itself had an
>> assumption that a GINSN_TYPE_JUMP to a non-local symbol will not be
>> seen. The latter can indeed be seen, and in fact, needs to be treated
>> the same way as an exit from the function in terms of control-flow.
>>
>> gas/
>> * ginsn.c (ginsn_direct_local_jump_p): Check if the symbol
>> is local to the code block or function being assembled.
>> (add_bb_at_ginsn): Remove buggy assumption.
>> (frch_ginsn_data_append): Direct jmps do not disqualify a stream
>> of ginsns from GCFG creation.
>>
>> gas/testsuite/
>> * gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.d: New test.
>> * gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.l: New test.
>> * gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.s: New test.
>> * gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-x86-64.exp: Add new test.
>>
>> gas: gcfg: address review comments for local jump issue
>>
>> ChangeLog:
>> * gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.d
>> * gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.l
>> * gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.s
>> ---
>> gas/ginsn.c | 47 +++++++++++--------
>> gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.d | 32 +++++++++++++
>> gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.l | 3 ++
>> gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.s | 43 +++++++++++++++++
>> gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-x86-64.exp | 2 +
>> 5 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>> create mode 100644 gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.d
>> create mode 100644 gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.l
>> create mode 100644 gas/testsuite/gas/scfi/x86_64/scfi-cfg-3.s
>
> ... below here, perhaps with another --- separator. This way it's clear
> that the revlog isn't going to be part of the commit message.
>
> Jan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, V2] gas: gcfg: fix handling of non-local direct jmps in gcfg
2024-03-28 16:26 ` Indu Bhagat
@ 2024-03-28 16:35 ` Jan Beulich
2024-03-28 23:03 ` Indu Bhagat
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2024-03-28 16:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Indu Bhagat; +Cc: binutils
On 28.03.2024 17:26, Indu Bhagat wrote:
> On 3/28/24 03:10, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 28.03.2024 08:59, Indu Bhagat wrote:
>>> [Changes in V2]
>>> - Add function level comments for ginsn_direct_local_jump_p.
>>> - Add a jmp to locally defined label in the testcase to make it more
>>> complete. Also, add a jmp to label defined in another function.
>>> The testcase now generates an additional warning (as expected):
>>> "Warning: GINSN: found unreachable code in func 'bar'"
>>
>> For this - can't you simply omit the unreachable pair of insns?
>
> We do omit those instructions from GCFG and SCFI. GAS does, however,
> warn for now. Do you mean skip this warning too?
No, I'm talking of only this one new testcase.
Jan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, V2] gas: gcfg: fix handling of non-local direct jmps in gcfg
2024-03-28 16:35 ` Jan Beulich
@ 2024-03-28 23:03 ` Indu Bhagat
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Indu Bhagat @ 2024-03-28 23:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Beulich; +Cc: binutils
On 3/28/24 09:35, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 28.03.2024 17:26, Indu Bhagat wrote:
>> On 3/28/24 03:10, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 28.03.2024 08:59, Indu Bhagat wrote:
>>>> [Changes in V2]
>>>> - Add function level comments for ginsn_direct_local_jump_p.
>>>> - Add a jmp to locally defined label in the testcase to make it more
>>>> complete. Also, add a jmp to label defined in another function.
>>>> The testcase now generates an additional warning (as expected):
>>>> "Warning: GINSN: found unreachable code in func 'bar'"
>>> For this - can't you simply omit the unreachable pair of insns?
>> We do omit those instructions from GCFG and SCFI. GAS does, however,
>> warn for now. Do you mean skip this warning too?
> No, I'm talking of only this one new testcase.
OK. I removed the unreachable pair of insns and the warning from the
testcase, and pushed.
Thanks
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-03-28 23:03 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-03-28 7:59 [PATCH, V2] gas: gcfg: fix handling of non-local direct jmps in gcfg Indu Bhagat
2024-03-28 10:10 ` Jan Beulich
2024-03-28 16:26 ` Indu Bhagat
2024-03-28 16:35 ` Jan Beulich
2024-03-28 23:03 ` Indu Bhagat
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).