public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
To: Martin Uecker <uecker@eecs.berkeley.edu>
Cc: gcc Mailing List <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
	       Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
	Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ubsan: improve bounds checking, add -fsanitize=bounds-strict
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2015 16:37:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150302163652.GA11480@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150227115314.77a3e8ba@lemur>

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 11:53:14AM -0800, Martin Uecker wrote:
> 
> I tested Marek's proposed change and it works correctly,
> i.e. arrays which are not part of a struct are now
> instrumented when accessed through a pointer. This also
> means that the following case is diagnosed (correctly)
> as undefined behaviour as pointed out by Richard:
> 
> int
> main (void)
> {
>   int *t = (int *) __builtin_malloc (sizeof (int) * 9);
>   int (*a)[3][3] = (int (*)[3][3])t;
>   (*a)[0][9] = 1;
> }
> 
> 
> I also wanted arrays which are the last elements of a
> struct which are not flexible-array members instrumented 
> correctly. So I added -fsantitize=bounds-strict which does
> this. It seems to do instrumentation similar to clang 
> with -fsanitize=bounds.
> 
> Comments?
 
Thanks for working on it.  So I think we should split this patch in
two; one part is a bug fix (I've opened
<https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65280>) that could go
into gcc 5 - that is, apply my fix along with test cases covering the
new cases, and the second part is an addition of a new option for
strict bounds checking - I'm afraid this part has to wait for gcc 6.

I can take care of the first part and let you do the second part, which I
could review.  Does that sound ok to you?

Jeff, would you agree with this approach?  The fix is sort of obvious
and my understanding is that Jakub's ok with it too.

	Marek

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-03-02 16:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-02-27 20:07 Martin Uecker
2015-03-01 21:47 ` Martin Uecker
2015-03-02 16:37 ` Marek Polacek [this message]
2015-03-02 17:26   ` Martin Uecker

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20150302163652.GA11480@redhat.com \
    --to=polacek@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=jakub@redhat.com \
    --cc=law@redhat.com \
    --cc=uecker@eecs.berkeley.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).