public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Qing Zhao <qing.zhao@oracle.com>
Cc: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>,
	richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>,
	gcc-patches Qing Zhao via <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][version 3]add -ftrivial-auto-var-init and variable attribute "uninitialized" to gcc
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 16:47:46 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <202106181644.1AF193B2@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <24CC2004-E379-4988-AC38-0EAAD9892862@oracle.com>

On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 07:39:02PM +0000, Qing Zhao wrote:
> So, the major question now is:
> 
> Is one single repeatable pattern enough for pattern initialization for all different types of auto variables?
> 
> If YES, then the implementation for pattern initialization will be much easier and simpler
>       as you pointed out. And will save me a lot of pain to implement this part.
> If NO, then we have to keep the current complicate implementation since it provides us
>       the flexibility to assign different patterns to different types.
> 
> Honestly, I don’t have a good justification on this question myself.
> 
> The previous references I have so far are the current behavior of CLANG and Microsoft compiler.
> 
> For your reference,
> . CLANG uses different patterns for INTEGER  (0xAAAAAAAA) and FLOAT (0xFFFFFFFF) and 32-bit pointer (0x000000AA)
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D54604
> . Microsoft uses different patterns for INTEGERS ( 0xE2), FLOAT (1.0)
> https://msrc-blog.microsoft.com/2020/05/13/solving-uninitialized-stack-memory-on-windows/
> 
> My understanding from CLANG’s comment is, the patterns are easier to crash the program for the certain type, therefore easier to
> catch any potential bugs.

Right, this is the justification for the different patterns. I am
fine with a static value for the first version of this functionality,
as long as it's a non-canonical virtual memory address when evaluated
as a pointer (so that the pattern can't be made to aim at a legitimate
fixed allocatable address in memory).

> Don’t know why Microsoft chose the pattern like this.
> 
> So, For GCC, what should we do on the pattern initializations, shall we choose one single repeatable pattern for all the types as you suggested,
> Or chose different patterns for different types as Clang and Microsoft compiler’s behavior?
> 
> Kees, do you have any comment on this?
> 
> How did Linux Kernel use -ftrivial-auto-var-init=pattern feature of CLANG?

It's just used as-is from the compiler, and recommended for "debug
builds".

-- 
Kees Cook

  reply	other threads:[~2021-06-18 23:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-12 17:16 Qing Zhao
2021-05-25 19:26 ` Qing Zhao
2021-05-26 11:18 ` Richard Biener
2021-05-27 19:44   ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-07  7:48     ` Richard Biener
2021-06-07 16:13       ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-08  7:37         ` Richard Biener
2021-06-08 16:56           ` Kees Cook
2021-06-08 17:32             ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-08 17:36               ` Kees Cook
2021-06-07 23:45       ` Kees Cook
2021-06-08  8:27         ` Richard Biener
2021-05-27 21:42   ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-03 20:14   ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-07  7:50     ` Richard Biener
2021-06-03 20:18   ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-07  7:53     ` Richard Biener
2021-06-07 16:18       ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-07 23:48         ` Kees Cook
2021-06-08  7:41         ` Richard Biener
2021-06-08 15:27           ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-08 16:59           ` Kees Cook
2021-06-08 18:05             ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-11 11:04             ` Richard Biener
2021-06-11 17:14               ` Kees Cook
2021-06-10 21:11   ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-11 11:12     ` Richard Biener
2021-06-11 15:49       ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-11 16:24         ` Kees Cook
2021-06-11 17:00         ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-14 16:10         ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-15 13:21           ` Richard Biener
2021-06-15 21:49             ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-16  6:19               ` Richard Biener
2021-06-16 15:04                 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-16 19:39                   ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-18 23:47                     ` Kees Cook [this message]
2021-06-21 15:39                       ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-21 16:18                         ` Kees Cook
2021-06-21 17:11                           ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-22  8:25                           ` Richard Sandiford
2021-06-22  8:59                             ` Richard Biener
2021-06-22 13:54                               ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-22 14:00                                 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-22 14:10                                   ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-22 14:15                                     ` Richard Biener
2021-06-22 14:33                                       ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-22 19:04                                         ` Richard Biener
2021-06-22 17:55                             ` Kees Cook
2021-06-22 18:18                               ` Richard Sandiford
2021-06-22 21:31                                 ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-23  6:05                                   ` Richard Biener
2021-06-21  7:53                   ` Richard Biener
2021-06-21 15:11                     ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-21 15:35                       ` Richard Biener
2021-06-21 16:13                         ` Qing Zhao
2021-06-22  6:24                           ` Richard Biener

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=202106181644.1AF193B2@keescook \
    --to=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=qing.zhao@oracle.com \
    --cc=rguenther@suse.de \
    --cc=richard.sandiford@arm.com \
    /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).