From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66C443858C83 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:23:42 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 66C443858C83 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com Received: from pps.filterd (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 28QLuKAC003457 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:23:42 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=pp1; bh=zd3pZBcVom5Ke3muq4+/D9CmwhOaExJZ4tzrqBvndPA=; b=VJs2Lcp2hFdQ5RsTfzN2MQRH5D6liNuqoqcZAPTPmvMquQD6iqpCnl0G4/MktWSW/bXb 48PgQKYelRZgCUPfk5eBykGCVY31Z9KM3PqZGz9aQgL3gvA06eWWLROZ+D0Q2p5DJyQW FqYDpOZXH8cyGMHI0rdInZE9QOL7LGXzQSpHBBrmKlTZeT6iaxMsicB9oFpvHuflM4NT 2v2mcIfxq5ZOnqbJcH8HkBZeg4gj8vOKyZbrFqyXg13rrxYixpiwUcM+t3Q0Gwq3pNx+ 29wkIpIOzyu013UCUWuScK8KgBaunPZd4iI3WYZ1iJ4LVIes9ee472BywMloWHSQvkxk Lg== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3jumefujq2-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:23:41 +0000 Received: from m0098421.ppops.net (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 28QNv0Ww032581 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:23:41 GMT Received: from ppma03fra.de.ibm.com (6b.4a.5195.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [149.81.74.107]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3jumefujpn-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:23:41 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 28R0KqNA002217; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:23:39 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay13.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.198]) by ppma03fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3jssh929af-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:23:39 +0000 Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.62]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 28R0NaFX1049144 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:23:36 GMT Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21CEEAE04D; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:23:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCEAEAE045; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:23:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from heavy.ibmuc.com (unknown [9.171.90.176]) by d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:23:35 +0000 (GMT) From: Ilya Leoshkevich To: Jakub Jelinek Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Ilya Leoshkevich Subject: [PATCH v5 0/2] IBM zSystems: Improve storing asan frame_pc Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2022 02:23:32 +0200 Message-Id: <20220927002334.651057-1-iii@linux.ibm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.37.2 X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: qFWbhrzuH4EX--WTBeyHGDwyVHOv_GLc X-Proofpoint-GUID: dpjJhP-DWeXnl5I4FWZLVw7tIIEc9AvM Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Proofpoint-UnRewURL: 0 URL was un-rewritten MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.895,Hydra:6.0.528,FMLib:17.11.122.1 definitions=2022-09-26_11,2022-09-22_02,2022-06-22_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 adultscore=0 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 lowpriorityscore=0 clxscore=1015 spamscore=0 impostorscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=649 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2209130000 definitions=main-2209260149 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_EF,KAM_SHORT,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Hi, This is a resend of v4 with slightly adjusted commit messages: v1: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2019-July/525016.html v2: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2019-July/525069.html v3: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-June/548338.html v4: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-July/549252.html It still survives the bootstrap and the regtest on x86_64-redhat-linux, s390x-redhat-linux and ppc64le-redhat-linux. It also fixes [1]. I also tried the approach with moving .LASANPC closer to the function label and using FUNCTION_BOUNDARY instead of introducing CODE_LABEL_BOUNDARY, but the problem there is that it's hard to catch the moment where the function label is written. Architectures can do it by calling ASM_OUTPUT_LABEL() or assemble_name() in ASM_DECLARE_FUNCTION_NAME(), ASM_OUTPUT_FUNCTION_LABEL() or TARGET_ASM_FUNCTION_PROLOGUE(). epiphany_start_function() does that twice, but passes the same decl to both calls. Note that simply moving asan_function_start() to final_start_function_1() is not enough, since an architecture can write something after the function label. This all means that for this approach to work, all the architectures need to be adjusted, which looks like an overkill to me. Best regards, Ilya [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-April/593666.html Ilya Leoshkevich (2): asan: specify alignment for LASANPC labels IBM zSystems: Define CODE_LABEL_BOUNDARY gcc/asan.cc | 1 + gcc/config/s390/s390.h | 3 +++ gcc/defaults.h | 5 +++++ gcc/doc/tm.texi | 4 ++++ gcc/doc/tm.texi.in | 4 ++++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/s390/asan-no-gotoff.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ 6 files changed, 32 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/s390/asan-no-gotoff.c -- 2.37.2