* [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
@ 2013-10-31 10:27 Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-01 22:05 ` Joseph S. Myers
2013-11-04 10:48 ` Richard Biener
0 siblings, 2 replies; 31+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2013-10-31 10:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches
Hi,
This patch adds support Pointer Bounds Checker into c-family and LTO front-ends. The main purpose of changes in front-end is to register all statically initialized objects for checker. We also need to register such objects created by compiler.
Thanks,
Ilya
--
gcc/
2013-10-29 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
* c/c-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
* cp/cp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
* objc/objc-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
* objcp/objcp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
* lto/lto-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
* c/c-parser.c (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
* cp/decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Likewise.
* gimplify.c (gimplify_init_constructor): Likewise.
diff --git a/gcc/c/c-lang.c b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
index 614c46d..a32bc6b 100644
--- a/gcc/c/c-lang.c
+++ b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
@@ -43,6 +43,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_c;
#define LANG_HOOKS_INIT c_objc_common_init
#undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
#define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS c_common_init_ts
+#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
+#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
/* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
index 9ccae3b..65d83c8 100644
--- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c
+++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
@@ -1682,6 +1682,12 @@ c_parser_declaration_or_fndef (c_parser *parser, bool fndef_ok,
maybe_warn_string_init (TREE_TYPE (d), init);
finish_decl (d, init_loc, init.value,
init.original_type, asm_name);
+
+ /* Register all decls with initializers in Pointer
+ Bounds Checker to generate required static bounds
+ initializers. */
+ if (DECL_INITIAL (d) != error_mark_node)
+ chkp_register_var_initializer (d);
}
}
else
diff --git a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
index a7fa8e4..6d138bd 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
@@ -81,6 +81,8 @@ static tree get_template_argument_pack_elems_folded (const_tree);
#define LANG_HOOKS_EH_PERSONALITY cp_eh_personality
#undef LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE
#define LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE build_eh_type_type
+#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
+#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
/* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
index 1e92f2a..db40e75 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
@@ -6379,6 +6379,12 @@ cp_finish_decl (tree decl, tree init, bool init_const_expr_p,
the class specifier. */
if (!DECL_EXTERNAL (decl))
var_definition_p = true;
+
+ /* If var has initilizer then we need to register it in
+ Pointer Bounds Checker to generate static bounds initilizer
+ if required. */
+ if (DECL_INITIAL (decl) && DECL_INITIAL (decl) != error_mark_node)
+ chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
}
/* If the variable has an array type, lay out the type, even if
there is no initializer. It is valid to index through the
diff --git a/gcc/gimplify.c b/gcc/gimplify.c
index 4f52c27..503450f 100644
--- a/gcc/gimplify.c
+++ b/gcc/gimplify.c
@@ -4111,6 +4111,11 @@ gimplify_init_constructor (tree *expr_p, gimple_seq *pre_p, gimple_seq *post_p,
walk_tree (&ctor, force_labels_r, NULL, NULL);
ctor = tree_output_constant_def (ctor);
+
+ /* We need to register created constant object to
+ initialize bounds for pointers in it. */
+ chkp_register_var_initializer (ctor);
+
if (!useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (ctor)))
ctor = build1 (VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR, type, ctor);
TREE_OPERAND (*expr_p, 1) = ctor;
diff --git a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
index 0fa0fc9..b6073d9 100644
--- a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
+++ b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
@@ -1278,6 +1278,8 @@ static void lto_init_ts (void)
#undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
#define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS lto_init_ts
+#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
+#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
diff --git a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
index bc0008b..5e7e43b 100644
--- a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
+++ b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
@@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_objc;
#define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
#undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
#define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objc_common_init_ts
+#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
+#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
/* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
diff --git a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
index f9b126f..0bb80eb 100644
--- a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
+++ b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
@@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ static void objcxx_init_ts (void);
#define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
#undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
#define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objcxx_init_ts
+#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
+#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
/* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-10-31 10:27 [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support Ilya Enkovich
@ 2013-11-01 22:05 ` Joseph S. Myers
2013-11-05 12:55 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-04 10:48 ` Richard Biener
1 sibling, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Joseph S. Myers @ 2013-11-01 22:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich; +Cc: gcc-patches
On Thu, 31 Oct 2013, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> This patch adds support Pointer Bounds Checker into c-family and LTO
> front-ends. The main purpose of changes in front-end is to register all
> statically initialized objects for checker. We also need to register
> such objects created by compiler.
What happens with statically initialized TLS objects? It would seem that
you need something like how the C++ front end handles static constructors
for C++11 thread-local objects, but I don't see anything obvious for that
here.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-10-31 10:27 [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-01 22:05 ` Joseph S. Myers
@ 2013-11-04 10:48 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-05 13:03 ` Ilya Enkovich
1 sibling, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Richard Biener @ 2013-11-04 10:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch adds support Pointer Bounds Checker into c-family and LTO front-ends. The main purpose of changes in front-end is to register all statically initialized objects for checker. We also need to register such objects created by compiler.
You define CHKP as supported in LTO. That means it has to be supported
for all languages and thus you should drop the langhook.
Richard.
> Thanks,
> Ilya
> --
>
> gcc/
>
> 2013-10-29 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>
> * c/c-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
> * cp/cp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
> * objc/objc-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
> * objcp/objcp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
> * lto/lto-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
> * c/c-parser.c (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
> * cp/decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Likewise.
> * gimplify.c (gimplify_init_constructor): Likewise.
>
>
> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-lang.c b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
> index 614c46d..a32bc6b 100644
> --- a/gcc/c/c-lang.c
> +++ b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
> @@ -43,6 +43,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_c;
> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT c_objc_common_init
> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS c_common_init_ts
> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>
> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
> index 9ccae3b..65d83c8 100644
> --- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c
> +++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
> @@ -1682,6 +1682,12 @@ c_parser_declaration_or_fndef (c_parser *parser, bool fndef_ok,
> maybe_warn_string_init (TREE_TYPE (d), init);
> finish_decl (d, init_loc, init.value,
> init.original_type, asm_name);
> +
> + /* Register all decls with initializers in Pointer
> + Bounds Checker to generate required static bounds
> + initializers. */
> + if (DECL_INITIAL (d) != error_mark_node)
> + chkp_register_var_initializer (d);
> }
> }
> else
> diff --git a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
> index a7fa8e4..6d138bd 100644
> --- a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
> +++ b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
> @@ -81,6 +81,8 @@ static tree get_template_argument_pack_elems_folded (const_tree);
> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_PERSONALITY cp_eh_personality
> #undef LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE
> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE build_eh_type_type
> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>
> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
> diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
> index 1e92f2a..db40e75 100644
> --- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
> +++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
> @@ -6379,6 +6379,12 @@ cp_finish_decl (tree decl, tree init, bool init_const_expr_p,
> the class specifier. */
> if (!DECL_EXTERNAL (decl))
> var_definition_p = true;
> +
> + /* If var has initilizer then we need to register it in
> + Pointer Bounds Checker to generate static bounds initilizer
> + if required. */
> + if (DECL_INITIAL (decl) && DECL_INITIAL (decl) != error_mark_node)
> + chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
> }
> /* If the variable has an array type, lay out the type, even if
> there is no initializer. It is valid to index through the
> diff --git a/gcc/gimplify.c b/gcc/gimplify.c
> index 4f52c27..503450f 100644
> --- a/gcc/gimplify.c
> +++ b/gcc/gimplify.c
> @@ -4111,6 +4111,11 @@ gimplify_init_constructor (tree *expr_p, gimple_seq *pre_p, gimple_seq *post_p,
>
> walk_tree (&ctor, force_labels_r, NULL, NULL);
> ctor = tree_output_constant_def (ctor);
> +
> + /* We need to register created constant object to
> + initialize bounds for pointers in it. */
> + chkp_register_var_initializer (ctor);
> +
> if (!useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (ctor)))
> ctor = build1 (VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR, type, ctor);
> TREE_OPERAND (*expr_p, 1) = ctor;
> diff --git a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
> index 0fa0fc9..b6073d9 100644
> --- a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
> +++ b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
> @@ -1278,6 +1278,8 @@ static void lto_init_ts (void)
>
> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS lto_init_ts
> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>
> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>
> diff --git a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
> index bc0008b..5e7e43b 100644
> --- a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
> +++ b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
> @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_objc;
> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objc_common_init_ts
> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>
> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
> diff --git a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
> index f9b126f..0bb80eb 100644
> --- a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
> +++ b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
> @@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ static void objcxx_init_ts (void);
> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objcxx_init_ts
> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>
> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-01 22:05 ` Joseph S. Myers
@ 2013-11-05 12:55 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-05 13:05 ` Jakub Jelinek
0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2013-11-05 12:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joseph S. Myers; +Cc: gcc-patches
2013/11/2 Joseph S. Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>:
> On Thu, 31 Oct 2013, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>
>> This patch adds support Pointer Bounds Checker into c-family and LTO
>> front-ends. The main purpose of changes in front-end is to register all
>> statically initialized objects for checker. We also need to register
>> such objects created by compiler.
>
> What happens with statically initialized TLS objects? It would seem that
> you need something like how the C++ front end handles static constructors
> for C++11 thread-local objects, but I don't see anything obvious for that
> here.
This patch takes care of pointers initialized by linker. TLS objects
are dynamically allocated for each thread and should have some
constructor to perform initialization. And if there is such
constructors then it should be instrumented by Pointer Bounds Checker.
Therefore it should not require additional changes in front-end,
right?
The only problem I now see for TLS objects is that in my constructors
initialize bounds for an actual TLS object, not for object in .tdata.
How can I refer to .tdata objects in GIMPLE to get correct bounds
initialization for .tdata section?
Thanks,
Ilya
>
> --
> Joseph S. Myers
> joseph@codesourcery.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-04 10:48 ` Richard Biener
@ 2013-11-05 13:03 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-05 13:14 ` Richard Biener
0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2013-11-05 13:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Biener; +Cc: GCC Patches
2013/11/4 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch adds support Pointer Bounds Checker into c-family and LTO front-ends. The main purpose of changes in front-end is to register all statically initialized objects for checker. We also need to register such objects created by compiler.
LTO is quite specific front-end. For LTO Pointer Bounds Checker
support macro just means it allows instrumented code as input because
all instrumentation is performed before code is streamed out for LTO.
Ilya
>
> You define CHKP as supported in LTO. That means it has to be supported
> for all languages and thus you should drop the langhook.
>
> Richard.
>
>> Thanks,
>> Ilya
>> --
>>
>> gcc/
>>
>> 2013-10-29 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>>
>> * c/c-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>> * cp/cp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>> * objc/objc-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>> * objcp/objcp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>> * lto/lto-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>> * c/c-parser.c (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>> * cp/decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Likewise.
>> * gimplify.c (gimplify_init_constructor): Likewise.
>>
>>
>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-lang.c b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>> index 614c46d..a32bc6b 100644
>> --- a/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>> @@ -43,6 +43,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_c;
>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT c_objc_common_init
>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS c_common_init_ts
>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>
>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>> index 9ccae3b..65d83c8 100644
>> --- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>> @@ -1682,6 +1682,12 @@ c_parser_declaration_or_fndef (c_parser *parser, bool fndef_ok,
>> maybe_warn_string_init (TREE_TYPE (d), init);
>> finish_decl (d, init_loc, init.value,
>> init.original_type, asm_name);
>> +
>> + /* Register all decls with initializers in Pointer
>> + Bounds Checker to generate required static bounds
>> + initializers. */
>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (d) != error_mark_node)
>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (d);
>> }
>> }
>> else
>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>> index a7fa8e4..6d138bd 100644
>> --- a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>> +++ b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>> @@ -81,6 +81,8 @@ static tree get_template_argument_pack_elems_folded (const_tree);
>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_PERSONALITY cp_eh_personality
>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE
>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE build_eh_type_type
>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>
>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>> index 1e92f2a..db40e75 100644
>> --- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
>> +++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>> @@ -6379,6 +6379,12 @@ cp_finish_decl (tree decl, tree init, bool init_const_expr_p,
>> the class specifier. */
>> if (!DECL_EXTERNAL (decl))
>> var_definition_p = true;
>> +
>> + /* If var has initilizer then we need to register it in
>> + Pointer Bounds Checker to generate static bounds initilizer
>> + if required. */
>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (decl) && DECL_INITIAL (decl) != error_mark_node)
>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
>> }
>> /* If the variable has an array type, lay out the type, even if
>> there is no initializer. It is valid to index through the
>> diff --git a/gcc/gimplify.c b/gcc/gimplify.c
>> index 4f52c27..503450f 100644
>> --- a/gcc/gimplify.c
>> +++ b/gcc/gimplify.c
>> @@ -4111,6 +4111,11 @@ gimplify_init_constructor (tree *expr_p, gimple_seq *pre_p, gimple_seq *post_p,
>>
>> walk_tree (&ctor, force_labels_r, NULL, NULL);
>> ctor = tree_output_constant_def (ctor);
>> +
>> + /* We need to register created constant object to
>> + initialize bounds for pointers in it. */
>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (ctor);
>> +
>> if (!useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (ctor)))
>> ctor = build1 (VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR, type, ctor);
>> TREE_OPERAND (*expr_p, 1) = ctor;
>> diff --git a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>> index 0fa0fc9..b6073d9 100644
>> --- a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>> +++ b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>> @@ -1278,6 +1278,8 @@ static void lto_init_ts (void)
>>
>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS lto_init_ts
>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>
>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>
>> diff --git a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>> index bc0008b..5e7e43b 100644
>> --- a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>> +++ b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>> @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_objc;
>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objc_common_init_ts
>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>
>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>> diff --git a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>> index f9b126f..0bb80eb 100644
>> --- a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>> +++ b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>> @@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ static void objcxx_init_ts (void);
>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objcxx_init_ts
>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>
>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-05 12:55 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2013-11-05 13:05 ` Jakub Jelinek
2013-11-05 13:14 ` Ilya Enkovich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Jelinek @ 2013-11-05 13:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich; +Cc: Joseph S. Myers, gcc-patches
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 04:54:38PM +0400, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> 2013/11/2 Joseph S. Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>:
> > On Thu, 31 Oct 2013, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> >
> >> This patch adds support Pointer Bounds Checker into c-family and LTO
> >> front-ends. The main purpose of changes in front-end is to register all
> >> statically initialized objects for checker. We also need to register
> >> such objects created by compiler.
> >
> > What happens with statically initialized TLS objects? It would seem that
> > you need something like how the C++ front end handles static constructors
> > for C++11 thread-local objects, but I don't see anything obvious for that
> > here.
>
> This patch takes care of pointers initialized by linker. TLS objects
> are dynamically allocated for each thread and should have some
> constructor to perform initialization. And if there is such
> constructors then it should be instrumented by Pointer Bounds Checker.
> Therefore it should not require additional changes in front-end,
> right?
>
> The only problem I now see for TLS objects is that in my constructors
> initialize bounds for an actual TLS object, not for object in .tdata.
> How can I refer to .tdata objects in GIMPLE to get correct bounds
> initialization for .tdata section?
You can't. .tdata section is only used as data to copy to the TLS objects
when they are initialized (libc copies the whole .tdata section to the right
spot in the TLS are of each thread, followed by clearing the area
corresponding to .tbss section's size). TLS objects can have dynamic
constructors (fairly recent change), but they don't have to, if they don't,
they are just initialized by the memcpy from .tdata section.
Jakub
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-05 13:03 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2013-11-05 13:14 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-05 13:23 ` Ilya Enkovich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Richard Biener @ 2013-11-05 13:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/11/4 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This patch adds support Pointer Bounds Checker into c-family and LTO front-ends. The main purpose of changes in front-end is to register all statically initialized objects for checker. We also need to register such objects created by compiler.
>
> LTO is quite specific front-end. For LTO Pointer Bounds Checker
> support macro just means it allows instrumented code as input because
> all instrumentation is performed before code is streamed out for LTO.
But your patch doesn't even make use of the langhook...
Richard.
> Ilya
>
>>
>> You define CHKP as supported in LTO. That means it has to be supported
>> for all languages and thus you should drop the langhook.
>>
>> Richard.
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ilya
>>> --
>>>
>>> gcc/
>>>
>>> 2013-10-29 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>>>
>>> * c/c-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>> * cp/cp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>> * objc/objc-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>> * objcp/objcp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>> * lto/lto-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>> * c/c-parser.c (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
>>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>>> * cp/decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Likewise.
>>> * gimplify.c (gimplify_init_constructor): Likewise.
>>>
>>>
>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-lang.c b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>> index 614c46d..a32bc6b 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>> @@ -43,6 +43,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_c;
>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT c_objc_common_init
>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS c_common_init_ts
>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>
>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>> index 9ccae3b..65d83c8 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>> @@ -1682,6 +1682,12 @@ c_parser_declaration_or_fndef (c_parser *parser, bool fndef_ok,
>>> maybe_warn_string_init (TREE_TYPE (d), init);
>>> finish_decl (d, init_loc, init.value,
>>> init.original_type, asm_name);
>>> +
>>> + /* Register all decls with initializers in Pointer
>>> + Bounds Checker to generate required static bounds
>>> + initializers. */
>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (d) != error_mark_node)
>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (d);
>>> }
>>> }
>>> else
>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>> index a7fa8e4..6d138bd 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>> @@ -81,6 +81,8 @@ static tree get_template_argument_pack_elems_folded (const_tree);
>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_PERSONALITY cp_eh_personality
>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE
>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE build_eh_type_type
>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>
>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>> index 1e92f2a..db40e75 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>> @@ -6379,6 +6379,12 @@ cp_finish_decl (tree decl, tree init, bool init_const_expr_p,
>>> the class specifier. */
>>> if (!DECL_EXTERNAL (decl))
>>> var_definition_p = true;
>>> +
>>> + /* If var has initilizer then we need to register it in
>>> + Pointer Bounds Checker to generate static bounds initilizer
>>> + if required. */
>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (decl) && DECL_INITIAL (decl) != error_mark_node)
>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
>>> }
>>> /* If the variable has an array type, lay out the type, even if
>>> there is no initializer. It is valid to index through the
>>> diff --git a/gcc/gimplify.c b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>> index 4f52c27..503450f 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/gimplify.c
>>> +++ b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>> @@ -4111,6 +4111,11 @@ gimplify_init_constructor (tree *expr_p, gimple_seq *pre_p, gimple_seq *post_p,
>>>
>>> walk_tree (&ctor, force_labels_r, NULL, NULL);
>>> ctor = tree_output_constant_def (ctor);
>>> +
>>> + /* We need to register created constant object to
>>> + initialize bounds for pointers in it. */
>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (ctor);
>>> +
>>> if (!useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (ctor)))
>>> ctor = build1 (VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR, type, ctor);
>>> TREE_OPERAND (*expr_p, 1) = ctor;
>>> diff --git a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>> index 0fa0fc9..b6073d9 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>> +++ b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>> @@ -1278,6 +1278,8 @@ static void lto_init_ts (void)
>>>
>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS lto_init_ts
>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>
>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>
>>> diff --git a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>> index bc0008b..5e7e43b 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>> +++ b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>> @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_objc;
>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objc_common_init_ts
>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>
>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>> diff --git a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>> index f9b126f..0bb80eb 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>> +++ b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>> @@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ static void objcxx_init_ts (void);
>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objcxx_init_ts
>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>
>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-05 13:05 ` Jakub Jelinek
@ 2013-11-05 13:14 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-05 13:20 ` Jakub Jelinek
0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2013-11-05 13:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jakub Jelinek; +Cc: Joseph S. Myers, gcc-patches
2013/11/5 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>:
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 04:54:38PM +0400, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> 2013/11/2 Joseph S. Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>:
>> > On Thu, 31 Oct 2013, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> >
>> >> This patch adds support Pointer Bounds Checker into c-family and LTO
>> >> front-ends. The main purpose of changes in front-end is to register all
>> >> statically initialized objects for checker. We also need to register
>> >> such objects created by compiler.
>> >
>> > What happens with statically initialized TLS objects? It would seem that
>> > you need something like how the C++ front end handles static constructors
>> > for C++11 thread-local objects, but I don't see anything obvious for that
>> > here.
>>
>> This patch takes care of pointers initialized by linker. TLS objects
>> are dynamically allocated for each thread and should have some
>> constructor to perform initialization. And if there is such
>> constructors then it should be instrumented by Pointer Bounds Checker.
>> Therefore it should not require additional changes in front-end,
>> right?
>>
>> The only problem I now see for TLS objects is that in my constructors
>> initialize bounds for an actual TLS object, not for object in .tdata.
>> How can I refer to .tdata objects in GIMPLE to get correct bounds
>> initialization for .tdata section?
>
> You can't. .tdata section is only used as data to copy to the TLS objects
> when they are initialized (libc copies the whole .tdata section to the right
> spot in the TLS are of each thread, followed by clearing the area
> corresponding to .tbss section's size). TLS objects can have dynamic
> constructors (fairly recent change), but they don't have to, if they don't,
> they are just initialized by the memcpy from .tdata section.
It's sad I cannot just initialize bounds in Bounds Tables for .tdata,
memcpy would do all the job for me copying them for each new TLS
instance. The other way is to move all bounds initialization for TLS
objects into separate constructor. How can I make such constructor?
>
> Jakub
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-05 13:14 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2013-11-05 13:20 ` Jakub Jelinek
2013-11-05 13:28 ` Ilya Enkovich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Jelinek @ 2013-11-05 13:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich; +Cc: Joseph S. Myers, gcc-patches
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 05:13:12PM +0400, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> It's sad I cannot just initialize bounds in Bounds Tables for .tdata,
> memcpy would do all the job for me copying them for each new TLS
Why do you think so? glibc will surely use an internal version of
memcpy rather than the global one, so unless glibc is MPX enabled, it would
not do the job.
> instance. The other way is to move all bounds initialization for TLS
> objects into separate constructor. How can I make such constructor?
Just create a constructor for those, similarly how the C++ FE for __thread
vars with constructors (or OpenMP lowering for #pragma omp threadprivate
vars with constructors) expands them.
Jakub
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-05 13:14 ` Richard Biener
@ 2013-11-05 13:23 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-05 13:30 ` Richard Biener
0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2013-11-05 13:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Biener; +Cc: GCC Patches
2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2013/11/4 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> This patch adds support Pointer Bounds Checker into c-family and LTO front-ends. The main purpose of changes in front-end is to register all statically initialized objects for checker. We also need to register such objects created by compiler.
>>
>> LTO is quite specific front-end. For LTO Pointer Bounds Checker
>> support macro just means it allows instrumented code as input because
>> all instrumentation is performed before code is streamed out for LTO.
>
> But your patch doesn't even make use of the langhook...
Use of langhook is in previous patch
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-10/msg02408.html). Here is
it's part:
diff --git a/gcc/toplev.c b/gcc/toplev.c
index db269b7..0eaf081 100644
--- a/gcc/toplev.c
+++ b/gcc/toplev.c
@@ -1282,6 +1282,15 @@ process_options (void)
"and -ftree-loop-linear)");
#endif
+ if (flag_check_pointer_bounds)
+ {
+ if (targetm.chkp_bound_mode () == VOIDmode)
+ error ("-fcheck-pointers is not supported for this target");
+
+ if (!lang_hooks.chkp_supported)
+ flag_check_pointer_bounds = 0;
+ }
+
/* One region RA really helps to decrease the code size. */
if (flag_ira_region == IRA_REGION_AUTODETECT)
flag_ira_region
If we try to use -fcheck-pointers -flto for some unsupported language,
code will not be instrumented.
Ilya
>
> Richard.
>
>> Ilya
>>
>>>
>>> You define CHKP as supported in LTO. That means it has to be supported
>>> for all languages and thus you should drop the langhook.
>>>
>>> Richard.
>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Ilya
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> gcc/
>>>>
>>>> 2013-10-29 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> * c/c-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>> * cp/cp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>> * objc/objc-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>> * objcp/objcp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>> * lto/lto-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>> * c/c-parser.c (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
>>>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>>>> * cp/decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Likewise.
>>>> * gimplify.c (gimplify_init_constructor): Likewise.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-lang.c b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>> index 614c46d..a32bc6b 100644
>>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>> @@ -43,6 +43,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_c;
>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT c_objc_common_init
>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS c_common_init_ts
>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>
>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>> index 9ccae3b..65d83c8 100644
>>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>> @@ -1682,6 +1682,12 @@ c_parser_declaration_or_fndef (c_parser *parser, bool fndef_ok,
>>>> maybe_warn_string_init (TREE_TYPE (d), init);
>>>> finish_decl (d, init_loc, init.value,
>>>> init.original_type, asm_name);
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Register all decls with initializers in Pointer
>>>> + Bounds Checker to generate required static bounds
>>>> + initializers. */
>>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (d) != error_mark_node)
>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (d);
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> else
>>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>> index a7fa8e4..6d138bd 100644
>>>> --- a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>> @@ -81,6 +81,8 @@ static tree get_template_argument_pack_elems_folded (const_tree);
>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_PERSONALITY cp_eh_personality
>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE
>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE build_eh_type_type
>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>
>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>> index 1e92f2a..db40e75 100644
>>>> --- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>> @@ -6379,6 +6379,12 @@ cp_finish_decl (tree decl, tree init, bool init_const_expr_p,
>>>> the class specifier. */
>>>> if (!DECL_EXTERNAL (decl))
>>>> var_definition_p = true;
>>>> +
>>>> + /* If var has initilizer then we need to register it in
>>>> + Pointer Bounds Checker to generate static bounds initilizer
>>>> + if required. */
>>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (decl) && DECL_INITIAL (decl) != error_mark_node)
>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
>>>> }
>>>> /* If the variable has an array type, lay out the type, even if
>>>> there is no initializer. It is valid to index through the
>>>> diff --git a/gcc/gimplify.c b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>> index 4f52c27..503450f 100644
>>>> --- a/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>> +++ b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>> @@ -4111,6 +4111,11 @@ gimplify_init_constructor (tree *expr_p, gimple_seq *pre_p, gimple_seq *post_p,
>>>>
>>>> walk_tree (&ctor, force_labels_r, NULL, NULL);
>>>> ctor = tree_output_constant_def (ctor);
>>>> +
>>>> + /* We need to register created constant object to
>>>> + initialize bounds for pointers in it. */
>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (ctor);
>>>> +
>>>> if (!useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (ctor)))
>>>> ctor = build1 (VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR, type, ctor);
>>>> TREE_OPERAND (*expr_p, 1) = ctor;
>>>> diff --git a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>> index 0fa0fc9..b6073d9 100644
>>>> --- a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>> +++ b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>> @@ -1278,6 +1278,8 @@ static void lto_init_ts (void)
>>>>
>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS lto_init_ts
>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>
>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>> index bc0008b..5e7e43b 100644
>>>> --- a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>> +++ b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>> @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_objc;
>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objc_common_init_ts
>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>
>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>> diff --git a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>> index f9b126f..0bb80eb 100644
>>>> --- a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>> +++ b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>> @@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ static void objcxx_init_ts (void);
>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objcxx_init_ts
>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>
>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-05 13:20 ` Jakub Jelinek
@ 2013-11-05 13:28 ` Ilya Enkovich
0 siblings, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2013-11-05 13:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jakub Jelinek; +Cc: Joseph S. Myers, gcc-patches
2013/11/5 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>:
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 05:13:12PM +0400, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> It's sad I cannot just initialize bounds in Bounds Tables for .tdata,
>> memcpy would do all the job for me copying them for each new TLS
>
> Why do you think so? glibc will surely use an internal version of
> memcpy rather than the global one, so unless glibc is MPX enabled, it would
> not do the job.
>
>> instance. The other way is to move all bounds initialization for TLS
>> objects into separate constructor. How can I make such constructor?
>
> Just create a constructor for those, similarly how the C++ FE for __thread
> vars with constructors (or OpenMP lowering for #pragma omp threadprivate
> vars with constructors) expands them.
Will look into it. Thanks!
Ilya
>
> Jakub
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-05 13:23 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2013-11-05 13:30 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-05 13:39 ` Ilya Enkovich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Richard Biener @ 2013-11-05 13:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2013/11/4 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch adds support Pointer Bounds Checker into c-family and LTO front-ends. The main purpose of changes in front-end is to register all statically initialized objects for checker. We also need to register such objects created by compiler.
>>>
>>> LTO is quite specific front-end. For LTO Pointer Bounds Checker
>>> support macro just means it allows instrumented code as input because
>>> all instrumentation is performed before code is streamed out for LTO.
>>
>> But your patch doesn't even make use of the langhook...
>
> Use of langhook is in previous patch
> (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-10/msg02408.html). Here is
> it's part:
>
> diff --git a/gcc/toplev.c b/gcc/toplev.c
> index db269b7..0eaf081 100644
> --- a/gcc/toplev.c
> +++ b/gcc/toplev.c
> @@ -1282,6 +1282,15 @@ process_options (void)
> "and -ftree-loop-linear)");
> #endif
>
> + if (flag_check_pointer_bounds)
> + {
> + if (targetm.chkp_bound_mode () == VOIDmode)
> + error ("-fcheck-pointers is not supported for this target");
> +
> + if (!lang_hooks.chkp_supported)
> + flag_check_pointer_bounds = 0;
> + }
> +
> /* One region RA really helps to decrease the code size. */
> if (flag_ira_region == IRA_REGION_AUTODETECT)
> flag_ira_region
>
> If we try to use -fcheck-pointers -flto for some unsupported language,
> code will not be instrumented.
What's the reason to have unsupported languages?
Richard.
> Ilya
>
>>
>> Richard.
>>
>>> Ilya
>>>
>>>>
>>>> You define CHKP as supported in LTO. That means it has to be supported
>>>> for all languages and thus you should drop the langhook.
>>>>
>>>> Richard.
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Ilya
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> gcc/
>>>>>
>>>>> 2013-10-29 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> * c/c-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>> * cp/cp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>> * objc/objc-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>> * objcp/objcp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>> * lto/lto-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>> * c/c-parser.c (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
>>>>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>>>>> * cp/decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Likewise.
>>>>> * gimplify.c (gimplify_init_constructor): Likewise.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-lang.c b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>> index 614c46d..a32bc6b 100644
>>>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>> @@ -43,6 +43,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_c;
>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT c_objc_common_init
>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS c_common_init_ts
>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>
>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>> index 9ccae3b..65d83c8 100644
>>>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>> @@ -1682,6 +1682,12 @@ c_parser_declaration_or_fndef (c_parser *parser, bool fndef_ok,
>>>>> maybe_warn_string_init (TREE_TYPE (d), init);
>>>>> finish_decl (d, init_loc, init.value,
>>>>> init.original_type, asm_name);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /* Register all decls with initializers in Pointer
>>>>> + Bounds Checker to generate required static bounds
>>>>> + initializers. */
>>>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (d) != error_mark_node)
>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (d);
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>> else
>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>> index a7fa8e4..6d138bd 100644
>>>>> --- a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>> @@ -81,6 +81,8 @@ static tree get_template_argument_pack_elems_folded (const_tree);
>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_PERSONALITY cp_eh_personality
>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE
>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE build_eh_type_type
>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>
>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>> index 1e92f2a..db40e75 100644
>>>>> --- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>> @@ -6379,6 +6379,12 @@ cp_finish_decl (tree decl, tree init, bool init_const_expr_p,
>>>>> the class specifier. */
>>>>> if (!DECL_EXTERNAL (decl))
>>>>> var_definition_p = true;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /* If var has initilizer then we need to register it in
>>>>> + Pointer Bounds Checker to generate static bounds initilizer
>>>>> + if required. */
>>>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (decl) && DECL_INITIAL (decl) != error_mark_node)
>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
>>>>> }
>>>>> /* If the variable has an array type, lay out the type, even if
>>>>> there is no initializer. It is valid to index through the
>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/gimplify.c b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>> index 4f52c27..503450f 100644
>>>>> --- a/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>> +++ b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>> @@ -4111,6 +4111,11 @@ gimplify_init_constructor (tree *expr_p, gimple_seq *pre_p, gimple_seq *post_p,
>>>>>
>>>>> walk_tree (&ctor, force_labels_r, NULL, NULL);
>>>>> ctor = tree_output_constant_def (ctor);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /* We need to register created constant object to
>>>>> + initialize bounds for pointers in it. */
>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (ctor);
>>>>> +
>>>>> if (!useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (ctor)))
>>>>> ctor = build1 (VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR, type, ctor);
>>>>> TREE_OPERAND (*expr_p, 1) = ctor;
>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>> index 0fa0fc9..b6073d9 100644
>>>>> --- a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>> +++ b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>> @@ -1278,6 +1278,8 @@ static void lto_init_ts (void)
>>>>>
>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS lto_init_ts
>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>
>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>> index bc0008b..5e7e43b 100644
>>>>> --- a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>> +++ b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>> @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_objc;
>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objc_common_init_ts
>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>
>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>> index f9b126f..0bb80eb 100644
>>>>> --- a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>> +++ b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>> @@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ static void objcxx_init_ts (void);
>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objcxx_init_ts
>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>
>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-05 13:30 ` Richard Biener
@ 2013-11-05 13:39 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-05 13:45 ` Richard Biener
0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2013-11-05 13:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Biener; +Cc: GCC Patches
2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 2013/11/4 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This patch adds support Pointer Bounds Checker into c-family and LTO front-ends. The main purpose of changes in front-end is to register all statically initialized objects for checker. We also need to register such objects created by compiler.
>>>>
>>>> LTO is quite specific front-end. For LTO Pointer Bounds Checker
>>>> support macro just means it allows instrumented code as input because
>>>> all instrumentation is performed before code is streamed out for LTO.
>>>
>>> But your patch doesn't even make use of the langhook...
>>
>> Use of langhook is in previous patch
>> (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-10/msg02408.html). Here is
>> it's part:
>>
>> diff --git a/gcc/toplev.c b/gcc/toplev.c
>> index db269b7..0eaf081 100644
>> --- a/gcc/toplev.c
>> +++ b/gcc/toplev.c
>> @@ -1282,6 +1282,15 @@ process_options (void)
>> "and -ftree-loop-linear)");
>> #endif
>>
>> + if (flag_check_pointer_bounds)
>> + {
>> + if (targetm.chkp_bound_mode () == VOIDmode)
>> + error ("-fcheck-pointers is not supported for this target");
>> +
>> + if (!lang_hooks.chkp_supported)
>> + flag_check_pointer_bounds = 0;
>> + }
>> +
>> /* One region RA really helps to decrease the code size. */
>> if (flag_ira_region == IRA_REGION_AUTODETECT)
>> flag_ira_region
>>
>> If we try to use -fcheck-pointers -flto for some unsupported language,
>> code will not be instrumented.
>
> What's the reason to have unsupported languages?
For some languages (e.g. Java) Pointer Bounds Checker does not make
sense at all. Others may require additional support in front-end. The
primary target is C family where solved problem is more critical.
Ilya
>
> Richard.
>
>> Ilya
>>
>>>
>>> Richard.
>>>
>>>> Ilya
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You define CHKP as supported in LTO. That means it has to be supported
>>>>> for all languages and thus you should drop the langhook.
>>>>>
>>>>> Richard.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Ilya
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> gcc/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2013-10-29 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * c/c-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>> * cp/cp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>> * objc/objc-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>> * objcp/objcp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>> * lto/lto-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>> * c/c-parser.c (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
>>>>>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>>>>>> * cp/decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Likewise.
>>>>>> * gimplify.c (gimplify_init_constructor): Likewise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-lang.c b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>> index 614c46d..a32bc6b 100644
>>>>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>> @@ -43,6 +43,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_c;
>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT c_objc_common_init
>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS c_common_init_ts
>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>> index 9ccae3b..65d83c8 100644
>>>>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>> @@ -1682,6 +1682,12 @@ c_parser_declaration_or_fndef (c_parser *parser, bool fndef_ok,
>>>>>> maybe_warn_string_init (TREE_TYPE (d), init);
>>>>>> finish_decl (d, init_loc, init.value,
>>>>>> init.original_type, asm_name);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* Register all decls with initializers in Pointer
>>>>>> + Bounds Checker to generate required static bounds
>>>>>> + initializers. */
>>>>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (d) != error_mark_node)
>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (d);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> else
>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>> index a7fa8e4..6d138bd 100644
>>>>>> --- a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>> @@ -81,6 +81,8 @@ static tree get_template_argument_pack_elems_folded (const_tree);
>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_PERSONALITY cp_eh_personality
>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE
>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE build_eh_type_type
>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>> index 1e92f2a..db40e75 100644
>>>>>> --- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>> @@ -6379,6 +6379,12 @@ cp_finish_decl (tree decl, tree init, bool init_const_expr_p,
>>>>>> the class specifier. */
>>>>>> if (!DECL_EXTERNAL (decl))
>>>>>> var_definition_p = true;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* If var has initilizer then we need to register it in
>>>>>> + Pointer Bounds Checker to generate static bounds initilizer
>>>>>> + if required. */
>>>>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (decl) && DECL_INITIAL (decl) != error_mark_node)
>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> /* If the variable has an array type, lay out the type, even if
>>>>>> there is no initializer. It is valid to index through the
>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/gimplify.c b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>> index 4f52c27..503450f 100644
>>>>>> --- a/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>> @@ -4111,6 +4111,11 @@ gimplify_init_constructor (tree *expr_p, gimple_seq *pre_p, gimple_seq *post_p,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> walk_tree (&ctor, force_labels_r, NULL, NULL);
>>>>>> ctor = tree_output_constant_def (ctor);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* We need to register created constant object to
>>>>>> + initialize bounds for pointers in it. */
>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (ctor);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> if (!useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (ctor)))
>>>>>> ctor = build1 (VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR, type, ctor);
>>>>>> TREE_OPERAND (*expr_p, 1) = ctor;
>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>> index 0fa0fc9..b6073d9 100644
>>>>>> --- a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>> @@ -1278,6 +1278,8 @@ static void lto_init_ts (void)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS lto_init_ts
>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>
>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>> index bc0008b..5e7e43b 100644
>>>>>> --- a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>> @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_objc;
>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objc_common_init_ts
>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>> index f9b126f..0bb80eb 100644
>>>>>> --- a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>> @@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ static void objcxx_init_ts (void);
>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objcxx_init_ts
>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-05 13:39 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2013-11-05 13:45 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-05 14:09 ` Ilya Enkovich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Richard Biener @ 2013-11-05 13:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 2013/11/4 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This patch adds support Pointer Bounds Checker into c-family and LTO front-ends. The main purpose of changes in front-end is to register all statically initialized objects for checker. We also need to register such objects created by compiler.
>>>>>
>>>>> LTO is quite specific front-end. For LTO Pointer Bounds Checker
>>>>> support macro just means it allows instrumented code as input because
>>>>> all instrumentation is performed before code is streamed out for LTO.
>>>>
>>>> But your patch doesn't even make use of the langhook...
>>>
>>> Use of langhook is in previous patch
>>> (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-10/msg02408.html). Here is
>>> it's part:
>>>
>>> diff --git a/gcc/toplev.c b/gcc/toplev.c
>>> index db269b7..0eaf081 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/toplev.c
>>> +++ b/gcc/toplev.c
>>> @@ -1282,6 +1282,15 @@ process_options (void)
>>> "and -ftree-loop-linear)");
>>> #endif
>>>
>>> + if (flag_check_pointer_bounds)
>>> + {
>>> + if (targetm.chkp_bound_mode () == VOIDmode)
>>> + error ("-fcheck-pointers is not supported for this target");
>>> +
>>> + if (!lang_hooks.chkp_supported)
>>> + flag_check_pointer_bounds = 0;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> /* One region RA really helps to decrease the code size. */
>>> if (flag_ira_region == IRA_REGION_AUTODETECT)
>>> flag_ira_region
>>>
>>> If we try to use -fcheck-pointers -flto for some unsupported language,
>>> code will not be instrumented.
>>
>> What's the reason to have unsupported languages?
>
> For some languages (e.g. Java) Pointer Bounds Checker does not make
> sense at all. Others may require additional support in front-end. The
> primary target is C family where solved problem is more critical.
What does break if you "enable" it for Java or other "unsupported"
languages? That is, if LTO is able to handle a mixed Java and
C binary then why can Java alone not handle it?
Richard.
> Ilya
>>
>> Richard.
>>
>>> Ilya
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Richard.
>>>>
>>>>> Ilya
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You define CHKP as supported in LTO. That means it has to be supported
>>>>>> for all languages and thus you should drop the langhook.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Richard.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Ilya
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> gcc/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2013-10-29 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * c/c-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>> * cp/cp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>> * objc/objc-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>> * objcp/objcp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>> * lto/lto-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>> * c/c-parser.c (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
>>>>>>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>>>>>>> * cp/decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Likewise.
>>>>>>> * gimplify.c (gimplify_init_constructor): Likewise.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-lang.c b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>>> index 614c46d..a32bc6b 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>>> @@ -43,6 +43,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_c;
>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT c_objc_common_init
>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS c_common_init_ts
>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>>> index 9ccae3b..65d83c8 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>>> @@ -1682,6 +1682,12 @@ c_parser_declaration_or_fndef (c_parser *parser, bool fndef_ok,
>>>>>>> maybe_warn_string_init (TREE_TYPE (d), init);
>>>>>>> finish_decl (d, init_loc, init.value,
>>>>>>> init.original_type, asm_name);
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + /* Register all decls with initializers in Pointer
>>>>>>> + Bounds Checker to generate required static bounds
>>>>>>> + initializers. */
>>>>>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (d) != error_mark_node)
>>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (d);
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>>> index a7fa8e4..6d138bd 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>>> @@ -81,6 +81,8 @@ static tree get_template_argument_pack_elems_folded (const_tree);
>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_PERSONALITY cp_eh_personality
>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE
>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE build_eh_type_type
>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>>> index 1e92f2a..db40e75 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>>> @@ -6379,6 +6379,12 @@ cp_finish_decl (tree decl, tree init, bool init_const_expr_p,
>>>>>>> the class specifier. */
>>>>>>> if (!DECL_EXTERNAL (decl))
>>>>>>> var_definition_p = true;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + /* If var has initilizer then we need to register it in
>>>>>>> + Pointer Bounds Checker to generate static bounds initilizer
>>>>>>> + if required. */
>>>>>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (decl) && DECL_INITIAL (decl) != error_mark_node)
>>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> /* If the variable has an array type, lay out the type, even if
>>>>>>> there is no initializer. It is valid to index through the
>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/gimplify.c b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>>> index 4f52c27..503450f 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>>> @@ -4111,6 +4111,11 @@ gimplify_init_constructor (tree *expr_p, gimple_seq *pre_p, gimple_seq *post_p,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> walk_tree (&ctor, force_labels_r, NULL, NULL);
>>>>>>> ctor = tree_output_constant_def (ctor);
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + /* We need to register created constant object to
>>>>>>> + initialize bounds for pointers in it. */
>>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (ctor);
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> if (!useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (ctor)))
>>>>>>> ctor = build1 (VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR, type, ctor);
>>>>>>> TREE_OPERAND (*expr_p, 1) = ctor;
>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>>> index 0fa0fc9..b6073d9 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>>> @@ -1278,6 +1278,8 @@ static void lto_init_ts (void)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS lto_init_ts
>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>>> index bc0008b..5e7e43b 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>>> @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_objc;
>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objc_common_init_ts
>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>>> index f9b126f..0bb80eb 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>>> @@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ static void objcxx_init_ts (void);
>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objcxx_init_ts
>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-05 13:45 ` Richard Biener
@ 2013-11-05 14:09 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-06 10:55 ` Richard Biener
0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2013-11-05 14:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Biener; +Cc: GCC Patches
2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 2013/11/4 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This patch adds support Pointer Bounds Checker into c-family and LTO front-ends. The main purpose of changes in front-end is to register all statically initialized objects for checker. We also need to register such objects created by compiler.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> LTO is quite specific front-end. For LTO Pointer Bounds Checker
>>>>>> support macro just means it allows instrumented code as input because
>>>>>> all instrumentation is performed before code is streamed out for LTO.
>>>>>
>>>>> But your patch doesn't even make use of the langhook...
>>>>
>>>> Use of langhook is in previous patch
>>>> (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-10/msg02408.html). Here is
>>>> it's part:
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/gcc/toplev.c b/gcc/toplev.c
>>>> index db269b7..0eaf081 100644
>>>> --- a/gcc/toplev.c
>>>> +++ b/gcc/toplev.c
>>>> @@ -1282,6 +1282,15 @@ process_options (void)
>>>> "and -ftree-loop-linear)");
>>>> #endif
>>>>
>>>> + if (flag_check_pointer_bounds)
>>>> + {
>>>> + if (targetm.chkp_bound_mode () == VOIDmode)
>>>> + error ("-fcheck-pointers is not supported for this target");
>>>> +
>>>> + if (!lang_hooks.chkp_supported)
>>>> + flag_check_pointer_bounds = 0;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> /* One region RA really helps to decrease the code size. */
>>>> if (flag_ira_region == IRA_REGION_AUTODETECT)
>>>> flag_ira_region
>>>>
>>>> If we try to use -fcheck-pointers -flto for some unsupported language,
>>>> code will not be instrumented.
>>>
>>> What's the reason to have unsupported languages?
>>
>> For some languages (e.g. Java) Pointer Bounds Checker does not make
>> sense at all. Others may require additional support in front-end. The
>> primary target is C family where solved problem is more critical.
>
> What does break if you "enable" it for Java or other "unsupported"
> languages? That is, if LTO is able to handle a mixed Java and
> C binary then why can Java alone not handle it?
In such case checker will produce useless overhead in Java code.
Resulting code will probably report some bound violations because Java
FE may generate code which seems wrong for Pointer Bounds Checker.
Ilya
>
> Richard.
>
>> Ilya
>>>
>>> Richard.
>>>
>>>> Ilya
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Richard.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ilya
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You define CHKP as supported in LTO. That means it has to be supported
>>>>>>> for all languages and thus you should drop the langhook.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Richard.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Ilya
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> gcc/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2013-10-29 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * c/c-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>> * cp/cp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>> * objc/objc-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>> * objcp/objcp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>> * lto/lto-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>> * c/c-parser.c (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
>>>>>>>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>>>>>>>> * cp/decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Likewise.
>>>>>>>> * gimplify.c (gimplify_init_constructor): Likewise.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-lang.c b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>>>> index 614c46d..a32bc6b 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>>>> @@ -43,6 +43,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_c;
>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT c_objc_common_init
>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS c_common_init_ts
>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>>>> index 9ccae3b..65d83c8 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>>>> @@ -1682,6 +1682,12 @@ c_parser_declaration_or_fndef (c_parser *parser, bool fndef_ok,
>>>>>>>> maybe_warn_string_init (TREE_TYPE (d), init);
>>>>>>>> finish_decl (d, init_loc, init.value,
>>>>>>>> init.original_type, asm_name);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + /* Register all decls with initializers in Pointer
>>>>>>>> + Bounds Checker to generate required static bounds
>>>>>>>> + initializers. */
>>>>>>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (d) != error_mark_node)
>>>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (d);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>>>> index a7fa8e4..6d138bd 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>>>> @@ -81,6 +81,8 @@ static tree get_template_argument_pack_elems_folded (const_tree);
>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_PERSONALITY cp_eh_personality
>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE
>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE build_eh_type_type
>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>>>> index 1e92f2a..db40e75 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>>>> @@ -6379,6 +6379,12 @@ cp_finish_decl (tree decl, tree init, bool init_const_expr_p,
>>>>>>>> the class specifier. */
>>>>>>>> if (!DECL_EXTERNAL (decl))
>>>>>>>> var_definition_p = true;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + /* If var has initilizer then we need to register it in
>>>>>>>> + Pointer Bounds Checker to generate static bounds initilizer
>>>>>>>> + if required. */
>>>>>>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (decl) && DECL_INITIAL (decl) != error_mark_node)
>>>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> /* If the variable has an array type, lay out the type, even if
>>>>>>>> there is no initializer. It is valid to index through the
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/gimplify.c b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>>>> index 4f52c27..503450f 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>>>> @@ -4111,6 +4111,11 @@ gimplify_init_constructor (tree *expr_p, gimple_seq *pre_p, gimple_seq *post_p,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> walk_tree (&ctor, force_labels_r, NULL, NULL);
>>>>>>>> ctor = tree_output_constant_def (ctor);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + /* We need to register created constant object to
>>>>>>>> + initialize bounds for pointers in it. */
>>>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (ctor);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> if (!useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (ctor)))
>>>>>>>> ctor = build1 (VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR, type, ctor);
>>>>>>>> TREE_OPERAND (*expr_p, 1) = ctor;
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>>>> index 0fa0fc9..b6073d9 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>>>> @@ -1278,6 +1278,8 @@ static void lto_init_ts (void)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS lto_init_ts
>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>>>> index bc0008b..5e7e43b 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>>>> @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_objc;
>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objc_common_init_ts
>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>>>> index f9b126f..0bb80eb 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>>>> @@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ static void objcxx_init_ts (void);
>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objcxx_init_ts
>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-05 14:09 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2013-11-06 10:55 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-06 10:58 ` Ilya Enkovich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Richard Biener @ 2013-11-06 10:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 2013/11/4 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This patch adds support Pointer Bounds Checker into c-family and LTO front-ends. The main purpose of changes in front-end is to register all statically initialized objects for checker. We also need to register such objects created by compiler.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> LTO is quite specific front-end. For LTO Pointer Bounds Checker
>>>>>>> support macro just means it allows instrumented code as input because
>>>>>>> all instrumentation is performed before code is streamed out for LTO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But your patch doesn't even make use of the langhook...
>>>>>
>>>>> Use of langhook is in previous patch
>>>>> (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-10/msg02408.html). Here is
>>>>> it's part:
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/toplev.c b/gcc/toplev.c
>>>>> index db269b7..0eaf081 100644
>>>>> --- a/gcc/toplev.c
>>>>> +++ b/gcc/toplev.c
>>>>> @@ -1282,6 +1282,15 @@ process_options (void)
>>>>> "and -ftree-loop-linear)");
>>>>> #endif
>>>>>
>>>>> + if (flag_check_pointer_bounds)
>>>>> + {
>>>>> + if (targetm.chkp_bound_mode () == VOIDmode)
>>>>> + error ("-fcheck-pointers is not supported for this target");
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (!lang_hooks.chkp_supported)
>>>>> + flag_check_pointer_bounds = 0;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> /* One region RA really helps to decrease the code size. */
>>>>> if (flag_ira_region == IRA_REGION_AUTODETECT)
>>>>> flag_ira_region
>>>>>
>>>>> If we try to use -fcheck-pointers -flto for some unsupported language,
>>>>> code will not be instrumented.
>>>>
>>>> What's the reason to have unsupported languages?
>>>
>>> For some languages (e.g. Java) Pointer Bounds Checker does not make
>>> sense at all. Others may require additional support in front-end. The
>>> primary target is C family where solved problem is more critical.
>>
>> What does break if you "enable" it for Java or other "unsupported"
>> languages? That is, if LTO is able to handle a mixed Java and
>> C binary then why can Java alone not handle it?
>
> In such case checker will produce useless overhead in Java code.
> Resulting code will probably report some bound violations because Java
> FE may generate code which seems wrong for Pointer Bounds Checker.
So it's only an issue that if you use it that it may trip over Java FE bugs?
Not a good reason to have a langhook - you can use the existing
post_options langhook for disallowing this?
Thanks,
Richard.
> Ilya
>
>>
>> Richard.
>>
>>> Ilya
>>>>
>>>> Richard.
>>>>
>>>>> Ilya
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Richard.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ilya
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You define CHKP as supported in LTO. That means it has to be supported
>>>>>>>> for all languages and thus you should drop the langhook.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Richard.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Ilya
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> gcc/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2013-10-29 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> * c/c-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>>> * cp/cp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>>> * objc/objc-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>>> * objcp/objcp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>>> * lto/lto-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>>> * c/c-parser.c (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
>>>>>>>>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>>>>>>>>> * cp/decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Likewise.
>>>>>>>>> * gimplify.c (gimplify_init_constructor): Likewise.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-lang.c b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>>>>> index 614c46d..a32bc6b 100644
>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>>>>> @@ -43,6 +43,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_c;
>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT c_objc_common_init
>>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS c_common_init_ts
>>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>>>>> index 9ccae3b..65d83c8 100644
>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>>>>> @@ -1682,6 +1682,12 @@ c_parser_declaration_or_fndef (c_parser *parser, bool fndef_ok,
>>>>>>>>> maybe_warn_string_init (TREE_TYPE (d), init);
>>>>>>>>> finish_decl (d, init_loc, init.value,
>>>>>>>>> init.original_type, asm_name);
>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>> + /* Register all decls with initializers in Pointer
>>>>>>>>> + Bounds Checker to generate required static bounds
>>>>>>>>> + initializers. */
>>>>>>>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (d) != error_mark_node)
>>>>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (d);
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>> index a7fa8e4..6d138bd 100644
>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>> @@ -81,6 +81,8 @@ static tree get_template_argument_pack_elems_folded (const_tree);
>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_PERSONALITY cp_eh_personality
>>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE
>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE build_eh_type_type
>>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>>>>> index 1e92f2a..db40e75 100644
>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>>>>> @@ -6379,6 +6379,12 @@ cp_finish_decl (tree decl, tree init, bool init_const_expr_p,
>>>>>>>>> the class specifier. */
>>>>>>>>> if (!DECL_EXTERNAL (decl))
>>>>>>>>> var_definition_p = true;
>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>> + /* If var has initilizer then we need to register it in
>>>>>>>>> + Pointer Bounds Checker to generate static bounds initilizer
>>>>>>>>> + if required. */
>>>>>>>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (decl) && DECL_INITIAL (decl) != error_mark_node)
>>>>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>> /* If the variable has an array type, lay out the type, even if
>>>>>>>>> there is no initializer. It is valid to index through the
>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/gimplify.c b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>>>>> index 4f52c27..503450f 100644
>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>>>>> @@ -4111,6 +4111,11 @@ gimplify_init_constructor (tree *expr_p, gimple_seq *pre_p, gimple_seq *post_p,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> walk_tree (&ctor, force_labels_r, NULL, NULL);
>>>>>>>>> ctor = tree_output_constant_def (ctor);
>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>> + /* We need to register created constant object to
>>>>>>>>> + initialize bounds for pointers in it. */
>>>>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (ctor);
>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>> if (!useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (ctor)))
>>>>>>>>> ctor = build1 (VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR, type, ctor);
>>>>>>>>> TREE_OPERAND (*expr_p, 1) = ctor;
>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>>>>> index 0fa0fc9..b6073d9 100644
>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>>>>> @@ -1278,6 +1278,8 @@ static void lto_init_ts (void)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS lto_init_ts
>>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>>>>> index bc0008b..5e7e43b 100644
>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>>>>> @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_objc;
>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objc_common_init_ts
>>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>> index f9b126f..0bb80eb 100644
>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>> @@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ static void objcxx_init_ts (void);
>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objcxx_init_ts
>>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-06 10:55 ` Richard Biener
@ 2013-11-06 10:58 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-06 11:31 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-18 20:32 ` (g)fortran support for MPX (was: Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support) Tobias Burnus
0 siblings, 2 replies; 31+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2013-11-06 10:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Biener; +Cc: GCC Patches
2013/11/6 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 2013/11/4 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This patch adds support Pointer Bounds Checker into c-family and LTO front-ends. The main purpose of changes in front-end is to register all statically initialized objects for checker. We also need to register such objects created by compiler.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> LTO is quite specific front-end. For LTO Pointer Bounds Checker
>>>>>>>> support macro just means it allows instrumented code as input because
>>>>>>>> all instrumentation is performed before code is streamed out for LTO.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But your patch doesn't even make use of the langhook...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Use of langhook is in previous patch
>>>>>> (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-10/msg02408.html). Here is
>>>>>> it's part:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/toplev.c b/gcc/toplev.c
>>>>>> index db269b7..0eaf081 100644
>>>>>> --- a/gcc/toplev.c
>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/toplev.c
>>>>>> @@ -1282,6 +1282,15 @@ process_options (void)
>>>>>> "and -ftree-loop-linear)");
>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>>
>>>>>> + if (flag_check_pointer_bounds)
>>>>>> + {
>>>>>> + if (targetm.chkp_bound_mode () == VOIDmode)
>>>>>> + error ("-fcheck-pointers is not supported for this target");
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (!lang_hooks.chkp_supported)
>>>>>> + flag_check_pointer_bounds = 0;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> /* One region RA really helps to decrease the code size. */
>>>>>> if (flag_ira_region == IRA_REGION_AUTODETECT)
>>>>>> flag_ira_region
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If we try to use -fcheck-pointers -flto for some unsupported language,
>>>>>> code will not be instrumented.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's the reason to have unsupported languages?
>>>>
>>>> For some languages (e.g. Java) Pointer Bounds Checker does not make
>>>> sense at all. Others may require additional support in front-end. The
>>>> primary target is C family where solved problem is more critical.
>>>
>>> What does break if you "enable" it for Java or other "unsupported"
>>> languages? That is, if LTO is able to handle a mixed Java and
>>> C binary then why can Java alone not handle it?
>>
>> In such case checker will produce useless overhead in Java code.
>> Resulting code will probably report some bound violations because Java
>> FE may generate code which seems wrong for Pointer Bounds Checker.
>
> So it's only an issue that if you use it that it may trip over Java FE bugs?
> Not a good reason to have a langhook - you can use the existing
> post_options langhook for disallowing this?
The issue is that users do not get what expect. I do not want someone
having mixed codes get instrumentation for his Java/Fortran/Ada
functions which slows them down and does nothing useful. What is the
point to allow checks of pointer bounds for language with no pointers?
If I use post_options, I need to change hooks of languages that do not
care about checker to disable it. Now I have it disabled by default.
Using post_options will also require empty redefinition of
post_options in C languages with empty body which may be confusing.
If you do not like this hook, I can move all Pointer Bounds Checker
flags into c.opt and remove the hook. Should it be OK?
Thanks,
Ilya
>
> Thanks,
> Richard.
>
>> Ilya
>>
>>>
>>> Richard.
>>>
>>>> Ilya
>>>>>
>>>>> Richard.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ilya
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Richard.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ilya
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You define CHKP as supported in LTO. That means it has to be supported
>>>>>>>>> for all languages and thus you should drop the langhook.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Richard.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>> Ilya
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> gcc/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2013-10-29 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> * c/c-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>>>> * cp/cp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>>>> * objc/objc-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>>>> * objcp/objcp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>>>> * lto/lto-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>>>> * c/c-parser.c (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
>>>>>>>>>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>>>>>>>>>> * cp/decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Likewise.
>>>>>>>>>> * gimplify.c (gimplify_init_constructor): Likewise.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-lang.c b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>> index 614c46d..a32bc6b 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -43,6 +43,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_c;
>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT c_objc_common_init
>>>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS c_common_init_ts
>>>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>>>>>> index 9ccae3b..65d83c8 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -1682,6 +1682,12 @@ c_parser_declaration_or_fndef (c_parser *parser, bool fndef_ok,
>>>>>>>>>> maybe_warn_string_init (TREE_TYPE (d), init);
>>>>>>>>>> finish_decl (d, init_loc, init.value,
>>>>>>>>>> init.original_type, asm_name);
>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>> + /* Register all decls with initializers in Pointer
>>>>>>>>>> + Bounds Checker to generate required static bounds
>>>>>>>>>> + initializers. */
>>>>>>>>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (d) != error_mark_node)
>>>>>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (d);
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>> index a7fa8e4..6d138bd 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -81,6 +81,8 @@ static tree get_template_argument_pack_elems_folded (const_tree);
>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_PERSONALITY cp_eh_personality
>>>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE
>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE build_eh_type_type
>>>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>>>>>> index 1e92f2a..db40e75 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -6379,6 +6379,12 @@ cp_finish_decl (tree decl, tree init, bool init_const_expr_p,
>>>>>>>>>> the class specifier. */
>>>>>>>>>> if (!DECL_EXTERNAL (decl))
>>>>>>>>>> var_definition_p = true;
>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>> + /* If var has initilizer then we need to register it in
>>>>>>>>>> + Pointer Bounds Checker to generate static bounds initilizer
>>>>>>>>>> + if required. */
>>>>>>>>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (decl) && DECL_INITIAL (decl) != error_mark_node)
>>>>>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>> /* If the variable has an array type, lay out the type, even if
>>>>>>>>>> there is no initializer. It is valid to index through the
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/gimplify.c b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>>>>>> index 4f52c27..503450f 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -4111,6 +4111,11 @@ gimplify_init_constructor (tree *expr_p, gimple_seq *pre_p, gimple_seq *post_p,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> walk_tree (&ctor, force_labels_r, NULL, NULL);
>>>>>>>>>> ctor = tree_output_constant_def (ctor);
>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>> + /* We need to register created constant object to
>>>>>>>>>> + initialize bounds for pointers in it. */
>>>>>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (ctor);
>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>> if (!useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (ctor)))
>>>>>>>>>> ctor = build1 (VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR, type, ctor);
>>>>>>>>>> TREE_OPERAND (*expr_p, 1) = ctor;
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>> index 0fa0fc9..b6073d9 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -1278,6 +1278,8 @@ static void lto_init_ts (void)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS lto_init_ts
>>>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>> index bc0008b..5e7e43b 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_objc;
>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objc_common_init_ts
>>>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>> index f9b126f..0bb80eb 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ static void objcxx_init_ts (void);
>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objcxx_init_ts
>>>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-06 10:58 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2013-11-06 11:31 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-08 9:10 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-18 20:32 ` (g)fortran support for MPX (was: Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support) Tobias Burnus
1 sibling, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Richard Biener @ 2013-11-06 11:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/11/6 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 2013/11/5 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 2013/11/4 Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This patch adds support Pointer Bounds Checker into c-family and LTO front-ends. The main purpose of changes in front-end is to register all statically initialized objects for checker. We also need to register such objects created by compiler.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> LTO is quite specific front-end. For LTO Pointer Bounds Checker
>>>>>>>>> support macro just means it allows instrumented code as input because
>>>>>>>>> all instrumentation is performed before code is streamed out for LTO.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But your patch doesn't even make use of the langhook...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Use of langhook is in previous patch
>>>>>>> (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-10/msg02408.html). Here is
>>>>>>> it's part:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/toplev.c b/gcc/toplev.c
>>>>>>> index db269b7..0eaf081 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/toplev.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/toplev.c
>>>>>>> @@ -1282,6 +1282,15 @@ process_options (void)
>>>>>>> "and -ftree-loop-linear)");
>>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> + if (flag_check_pointer_bounds)
>>>>>>> + {
>>>>>>> + if (targetm.chkp_bound_mode () == VOIDmode)
>>>>>>> + error ("-fcheck-pointers is not supported for this target");
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + if (!lang_hooks.chkp_supported)
>>>>>>> + flag_check_pointer_bounds = 0;
>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> /* One region RA really helps to decrease the code size. */
>>>>>>> if (flag_ira_region == IRA_REGION_AUTODETECT)
>>>>>>> flag_ira_region
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If we try to use -fcheck-pointers -flto for some unsupported language,
>>>>>>> code will not be instrumented.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What's the reason to have unsupported languages?
>>>>>
>>>>> For some languages (e.g. Java) Pointer Bounds Checker does not make
>>>>> sense at all. Others may require additional support in front-end. The
>>>>> primary target is C family where solved problem is more critical.
>>>>
>>>> What does break if you "enable" it for Java or other "unsupported"
>>>> languages? That is, if LTO is able to handle a mixed Java and
>>>> C binary then why can Java alone not handle it?
>>>
>>> In such case checker will produce useless overhead in Java code.
>>> Resulting code will probably report some bound violations because Java
>>> FE may generate code which seems wrong for Pointer Bounds Checker.
>>
>> So it's only an issue that if you use it that it may trip over Java FE bugs?
>> Not a good reason to have a langhook - you can use the existing
>> post_options langhook for disallowing this?
>
> The issue is that users do not get what expect. I do not want someone
> having mixed codes get instrumentation for his Java/Fortran/Ada
> functions which slows them down and does nothing useful. What is the
> point to allow checks of pointer bounds for language with no pointers?
>
> If I use post_options, I need to change hooks of languages that do not
> care about checker to disable it. Now I have it disabled by default.
No, you'd change the hooks to complain about the flag.
> Using post_options will also require empty redefinition of
> post_options in C languages with empty body which may be confusing.
>
> If you do not like this hook, I can move all Pointer Bounds Checker
> flags into c.opt and remove the hook. Should it be OK?
That works for me if for LTO it is enough to see the instrumented IL
to do the right thing, that is, no flag tests appear in middle-end code
[You can also simply add LTO to the list of supported languages of course,
still no flag checks hint at a "proper" design].
Richard.
> Thanks,
> Ilya
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Richard.
>>
>>> Ilya
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Richard.
>>>>
>>>>> Ilya
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Richard.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ilya
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Richard.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ilya
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You define CHKP as supported in LTO. That means it has to be supported
>>>>>>>>>> for all languages and thus you should drop the langhook.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Richard.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>> Ilya
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> gcc/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 2013-10-29 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> * c/c-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>>>>> * cp/cp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>>>>> * objc/objc-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>>>>> * objcp/objcp-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>>>>> * lto/lto-lang.c (LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED): New.
>>>>>>>>>>> * c/c-parser.c (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
>>>>>>>>>>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>>>>>>>>>>> * cp/decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Likewise.
>>>>>>>>>>> * gimplify.c (gimplify_init_constructor): Likewise.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-lang.c b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>>> index 614c46d..a32bc6b 100644
>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -43,6 +43,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_c;
>>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT c_objc_common_init
>>>>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS c_common_init_ts
>>>>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>>>>>>> index 9ccae3b..65d83c8 100644
>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -1682,6 +1682,12 @@ c_parser_declaration_or_fndef (c_parser *parser, bool fndef_ok,
>>>>>>>>>>> maybe_warn_string_init (TREE_TYPE (d), init);
>>>>>>>>>>> finish_decl (d, init_loc, init.value,
>>>>>>>>>>> init.original_type, asm_name);
>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>> + /* Register all decls with initializers in Pointer
>>>>>>>>>>> + Bounds Checker to generate required static bounds
>>>>>>>>>>> + initializers. */
>>>>>>>>>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (d) != error_mark_node)
>>>>>>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (d);
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>>> index a7fa8e4..6d138bd 100644
>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/cp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -81,6 +81,8 @@ static tree get_template_argument_pack_elems_folded (const_tree);
>>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_PERSONALITY cp_eh_personality
>>>>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE
>>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_EH_RUNTIME_TYPE build_eh_type_type
>>>>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>>>>>>> index 1e92f2a..db40e75 100644
>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -6379,6 +6379,12 @@ cp_finish_decl (tree decl, tree init, bool init_const_expr_p,
>>>>>>>>>>> the class specifier. */
>>>>>>>>>>> if (!DECL_EXTERNAL (decl))
>>>>>>>>>>> var_definition_p = true;
>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>> + /* If var has initilizer then we need to register it in
>>>>>>>>>>> + Pointer Bounds Checker to generate static bounds initilizer
>>>>>>>>>>> + if required. */
>>>>>>>>>>> + if (DECL_INITIAL (decl) && DECL_INITIAL (decl) != error_mark_node)
>>>>>>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>> /* If the variable has an array type, lay out the type, even if
>>>>>>>>>>> there is no initializer. It is valid to index through the
>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/gimplify.c b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>>>>>>> index 4f52c27..503450f 100644
>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/gimplify.c
>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -4111,6 +4111,11 @@ gimplify_init_constructor (tree *expr_p, gimple_seq *pre_p, gimple_seq *post_p,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> walk_tree (&ctor, force_labels_r, NULL, NULL);
>>>>>>>>>>> ctor = tree_output_constant_def (ctor);
>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>> + /* We need to register created constant object to
>>>>>>>>>>> + initialize bounds for pointers in it. */
>>>>>>>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (ctor);
>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>> if (!useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (ctor)))
>>>>>>>>>>> ctor = build1 (VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR, type, ctor);
>>>>>>>>>>> TREE_OPERAND (*expr_p, 1) = ctor;
>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>>> index 0fa0fc9..b6073d9 100644
>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/lto/lto-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -1278,6 +1278,8 @@ static void lto_init_ts (void)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS lto_init_ts
>>>>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>>> index bc0008b..5e7e43b 100644
>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/objc/objc-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ enum c_language_kind c_language = clk_objc;
>>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>>>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objc_common_init_ts
>>>>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>>> index f9b126f..0bb80eb 100644
>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/objcp/objcp-lang.c
>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ static void objcxx_init_ts (void);
>>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_GIMPLIFY_EXPR objc_gimplify_expr
>>>>>>>>>>> #undef LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS
>>>>>>>>>>> #define LANG_HOOKS_INIT_TS objcxx_init_ts
>>>>>>>>>>> +#undef LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED
>>>>>>>>>>> +#define LANG_HOOKS_CHKP_SUPPORTED true
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> /* Each front end provides its own lang hook initializer. */
>>>>>>>>>>> struct lang_hooks lang_hooks = LANG_HOOKS_INITIALIZER;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-06 11:31 ` Richard Biener
@ 2013-11-08 9:10 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-18 10:37 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-18 17:58 ` Jeff Law
0 siblings, 2 replies; 31+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2013-11-08 9:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches; +Cc: GCC Patches
Hi,
Here is an updated patch version with no langhook.
Regarding TLS objects issue - I do not think compiler should compensate the absence of instrumentation in libraries. Compiler should be responsible for initialization of Bounds Tables for .tdata section. Correct data copy is a responsibility of library. User should use either instrumented library or wrapper calls if he needs this functionality.
Thanks,
Ilya
--
gcc/
2013-11-06 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
* c/c-parser.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
(c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
* cp/decl.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
(cp_finish_decl): Register statically
initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
* gimplify.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
(gimplify_init_constructor): Register statically
initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
index 9ccae3b..397b323 100644
--- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c
+++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
@@ -56,6 +56,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see
#include "cgraph.h"
#include "plugin.h"
#include "omp-low.h"
+#include "tree-chkp.h"
\f
/* Initialization routine for this file. */
@@ -1682,6 +1683,12 @@ c_parser_declaration_or_fndef (c_parser *parser, bool fndef_ok,
maybe_warn_string_init (TREE_TYPE (d), init);
finish_decl (d, init_loc, init.value,
init.original_type, asm_name);
+
+ /* Register all decls with initializers in Pointer
+ Bounds Checker to generate required static bounds
+ initializers. */
+ if (DECL_INITIAL (d) != error_mark_node)
+ chkp_register_var_initializer (d);
}
}
else
diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
index 1e92f2a..74df02f 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
@@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see
#include "splay-tree.h"
#include "plugin.h"
#include "cgraph.h"
+#include "tree-chkp.h"
/* Possible cases of bad specifiers type used by bad_specifiers. */
enum bad_spec_place {
@@ -6379,6 +6380,12 @@ cp_finish_decl (tree decl, tree init, bool init_const_expr_p,
the class specifier. */
if (!DECL_EXTERNAL (decl))
var_definition_p = true;
+
+ /* If var has initilizer then we need to register it in
+ Pointer Bounds Checker to generate static bounds initilizer
+ if required. */
+ if (DECL_INITIAL (decl) && DECL_INITIAL (decl) != error_mark_node)
+ chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
}
/* If the variable has an array type, lay out the type, even if
there is no initializer. It is valid to index through the
diff --git a/gcc/gimplify.c b/gcc/gimplify.c
index 4f52c27..7aaac15 100644
--- a/gcc/gimplify.c
+++ b/gcc/gimplify.c
@@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see
#include "vec.h"
#include "omp-low.h"
#include "gimple-low.h"
+#include "tree-chkp.h"
#include "langhooks-def.h" /* FIXME: for lhd_set_decl_assembler_name */
#include "tree-pass.h" /* FIXME: only for PROP_gimple_any */
@@ -4111,6 +4112,11 @@ gimplify_init_constructor (tree *expr_p, gimple_seq *pre_p, gimple_seq *post_p,
walk_tree (&ctor, force_labels_r, NULL, NULL);
ctor = tree_output_constant_def (ctor);
+
+ /* We need to register created constant object to
+ initialize bounds for pointers in it. */
+ chkp_register_var_initializer (ctor);
+
if (!useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (ctor)))
ctor = build1 (VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR, type, ctor);
TREE_OPERAND (*expr_p, 1) = ctor;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-08 9:10 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2013-11-18 10:37 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-18 17:58 ` Jeff Law
1 sibling, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2013-11-18 10:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches
Ping
2013/11/8 Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com>:
> Hi,
>
> Here is an updated patch version with no langhook.
>
> Regarding TLS objects issue - I do not think compiler should compensate the absence of instrumentation in libraries. Compiler should be responsible for initialization of Bounds Tables for .tdata section. Correct data copy is a responsibility of library. User should use either instrumented library or wrapper calls if he needs this functionality.
>
> Thanks,
> Ilya
> --
> gcc/
>
> 2013-11-06 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>
> * c/c-parser.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
> (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
> * cp/decl.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
> (cp_finish_decl): Register statically
> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
> * gimplify.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
> (gimplify_init_constructor): Register statically
> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>
>
> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
> index 9ccae3b..397b323 100644
> --- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c
> +++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
> @@ -56,6 +56,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see
> #include "cgraph.h"
> #include "plugin.h"
> #include "omp-low.h"
> +#include "tree-chkp.h"
>
>
> /* Initialization routine for this file. */
> @@ -1682,6 +1683,12 @@ c_parser_declaration_or_fndef (c_parser *parser, bool fndef_ok,
> maybe_warn_string_init (TREE_TYPE (d), init);
> finish_decl (d, init_loc, init.value,
> init.original_type, asm_name);
> +
> + /* Register all decls with initializers in Pointer
> + Bounds Checker to generate required static bounds
> + initializers. */
> + if (DECL_INITIAL (d) != error_mark_node)
> + chkp_register_var_initializer (d);
> }
> }
> else
> diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
> index 1e92f2a..74df02f 100644
> --- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
> +++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
> @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see
> #include "splay-tree.h"
> #include "plugin.h"
> #include "cgraph.h"
> +#include "tree-chkp.h"
>
> /* Possible cases of bad specifiers type used by bad_specifiers. */
> enum bad_spec_place {
> @@ -6379,6 +6380,12 @@ cp_finish_decl (tree decl, tree init, bool init_const_expr_p,
> the class specifier. */
> if (!DECL_EXTERNAL (decl))
> var_definition_p = true;
> +
> + /* If var has initilizer then we need to register it in
> + Pointer Bounds Checker to generate static bounds initilizer
> + if required. */
> + if (DECL_INITIAL (decl) && DECL_INITIAL (decl) != error_mark_node)
> + chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
> }
> /* If the variable has an array type, lay out the type, even if
> there is no initializer. It is valid to index through the
> diff --git a/gcc/gimplify.c b/gcc/gimplify.c
> index 4f52c27..7aaac15 100644
> --- a/gcc/gimplify.c
> +++ b/gcc/gimplify.c
> @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see
> #include "vec.h"
> #include "omp-low.h"
> #include "gimple-low.h"
> +#include "tree-chkp.h"
>
> #include "langhooks-def.h" /* FIXME: for lhd_set_decl_assembler_name */
> #include "tree-pass.h" /* FIXME: only for PROP_gimple_any */
> @@ -4111,6 +4112,11 @@ gimplify_init_constructor (tree *expr_p, gimple_seq *pre_p, gimple_seq *post_p,
>
> walk_tree (&ctor, force_labels_r, NULL, NULL);
> ctor = tree_output_constant_def (ctor);
> +
> + /* We need to register created constant object to
> + initialize bounds for pointers in it. */
> + chkp_register_var_initializer (ctor);
> +
> if (!useless_type_conversion_p (type, TREE_TYPE (ctor)))
> ctor = build1 (VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR, type, ctor);
> TREE_OPERAND (*expr_p, 1) = ctor;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-08 9:10 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-18 10:37 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2013-11-18 17:58 ` Jeff Law
2013-11-19 13:01 ` Richard Biener
1 sibling, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Law @ 2013-11-18 17:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich, gcc-patches
On 11/08/13 02:02, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here is an updated patch version with no langhook.
>
> Regarding TLS objects issue - I do not think compiler should compensate the absence of instrumentation in libraries. Compiler should be responsible for initialization of Bounds Tables for .tdata section. Correct data copy is a responsibility of library. User should use either instrumented library or wrapper calls if he needs this functionality.
>
> Thanks,
> Ilya
> --
> gcc/
>
> 2013-11-06 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>
> * c/c-parser.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
> (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
> * cp/decl.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
> (cp_finish_decl): Register statically
> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
> * gimplify.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
> (gimplify_init_constructor): Register statically
> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
Is parsing really the right time to register these things with the
checking framework? Doesn't all this stuff flow through the gimplifier?
If so wouldn't that be a better place?
If it can be done in the gimplifier, which seems good from the
standpoint of simplifying the long term maintenance of the checking code.
If there's a good reason to have this front-end, please explain it.
Thanks,
Jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* (g)fortran support for MPX (was: Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support)
2013-11-06 10:58 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-06 11:31 ` Richard Biener
@ 2013-11-18 20:32 ` Tobias Burnus
2013-11-18 22:40 ` Ilya Enkovich
1 sibling, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Tobias Burnus @ 2013-11-18 20:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich, Richard Biener; +Cc: GCC Patches, gfortran
Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> The issue is that users do not get what expect. I do not want someone
> having mixed codes get instrumentation for his Java/Fortran/Ada
> functions which slows them down and does nothing useful. What is the
> point to allow checks of pointer bounds for language with no pointers?
Talking about Fortran, I wonder which modifications are required to get
it working. Can you give some pointers? I lost a bit track.
(For readers, who haven't followed: See
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Intel_MPX_support_in_the_GCC_compiler )
In Fortran, often an array is described by an array descriptor, a struct
which carries both the pointer address and the array bounds. Thus, that
makes it simpler to check for bound violations at runtime (existing
-fcheck=bounds). However, arrays can also be passed as in a way that
only the address is known – in that case, one has the same issues as
with C. One place where the issue occurs is interoperating with C, but
also within Fortran it can occur. I think especially for
interoperability with C (C++ with extern "c", etc.), having the checks
would be useful.
I have to admit that it is not completely clear to me when to best add
MPX annotations with Fortran, but as it is explicitly controlled by a
compile-time flag, there is no real reason for not using it.
Tobias
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: (g)fortran support for MPX (was: Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support)
2013-11-18 20:32 ` (g)fortran support for MPX (was: Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support) Tobias Burnus
@ 2013-11-18 22:40 ` Ilya Enkovich
0 siblings, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2013-11-18 22:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tobias Burnus; +Cc: Richard Biener, GCC Patches, gfortran
2013/11/18 Tobias Burnus <burnus@net-b.de>:
> Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>>
>> The issue is that users do not get what expect. I do not want someone
>> having mixed codes get instrumentation for his Java/Fortran/Ada
>> functions which slows them down and does nothing useful. What is the
>> point to allow checks of pointer bounds for language with no pointers?
>
>
> Talking about Fortran, I wonder which modifications are required to get it
> working. Can you give some pointers? I lost a bit track.
>
> (For readers, who haven't followed: See
> http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Intel_MPX_support_in_the_GCC_compiler )
>
> In Fortran, often an array is described by an array descriptor, a struct
> which carries both the pointer address and the array bounds. Thus, that
> makes it simpler to check for bound violations at runtime (existing
> -fcheck=bounds). However, arrays can also be passed as in a way that only
> the address is known – in that case, one has the same issues as with C. One
> place where the issue occurs is interoperating with C, but also within
> Fortran it can occur. I think especially for interoperability with C (C++
> with extern "c", etc.), having the checks would be useful.
>
> I have to admit that it is not completely clear to me when to best add MPX
> annotations with Fortran, but as it is explicitly controlled by a
> compile-time flag, there is no real reason for not using it.
Unfortunately I have only basic Fortran knowledge and cannot fully
estimate what may be required for its enabling. From stability point
of view there should not be significant problem. Instrumentation
itself should work OK, but most probably you would get more
instrumentation than you want. E.g. if you have array bounds placed
near array pointer, you do not need to use expensive Bounds Tables. If
you want only some particular type of pointers to be instrumented then
you need to add such feature. Also some language features may be
required (e.g. for C new attributes were added to mark arrays with
variable size and functions not requiring instrumentation).
Ilya
>
> Tobias
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-18 17:58 ` Jeff Law
@ 2013-11-19 13:01 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-19 13:38 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-19 21:26 ` Jeff Law
0 siblings, 2 replies; 31+ messages in thread
From: Richard Biener @ 2013-11-19 13:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff Law; +Cc: Ilya Enkovich, GCC Patches
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 11/08/13 02:02, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Here is an updated patch version with no langhook.
>>
>> Regarding TLS objects issue - I do not think compiler should compensate
>> the absence of instrumentation in libraries. Compiler should be responsible
>> for initialization of Bounds Tables for .tdata section. Correct data copy
>> is a responsibility of library. User should use either instrumented library
>> or wrapper calls if he needs this functionality.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ilya
>> --
>> gcc/
>>
>> 2013-11-06 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>>
>> * c/c-parser.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
>> (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>> * cp/decl.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
>> (cp_finish_decl): Register statically
>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>> * gimplify.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
>> (gimplify_init_constructor): Register statically
>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>
> Is parsing really the right time to register these things with the checking
> framework? Doesn't all this stuff flow through the gimplifier? If so
> wouldn't that be a better place?
>
> If it can be done in the gimplifier, which seems good from the standpoint of
> simplifying the long term maintenance of the checking code.
>
> If there's a good reason to have this front-end, please explain it.
I'd say not in the gimplifier either but in varpool (symbol table) code
where the symbols are ultimatively registered with?
Richard.
> Thanks,
> Jeff
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-19 13:01 ` Richard Biener
@ 2013-11-19 13:38 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-19 21:38 ` Jeff Law
2013-11-19 21:26 ` Jeff Law
1 sibling, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2013-11-19 13:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Biener; +Cc: Jeff Law, GCC Patches
On 19 Nov 13:00, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 11/08/13 02:02, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Here is an updated patch version with no langhook.
> >>
> >> Regarding TLS objects issue - I do not think compiler should compensate
> >> the absence of instrumentation in libraries. Compiler should be responsible
> >> for initialization of Bounds Tables for .tdata section. Correct data copy
> >> is a responsibility of library. User should use either instrumented library
> >> or wrapper calls if he needs this functionality.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Ilya
> >> --
> >> gcc/
> >>
> >> 2013-11-06 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
> >>
> >> * c/c-parser.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
> >> (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
> >> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
> >> * cp/decl.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
> >> (cp_finish_decl): Register statically
> >> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
> >> * gimplify.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
> >> (gimplify_init_constructor): Register statically
> >> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
> >
> > Is parsing really the right time to register these things with the checking
> > framework? Doesn't all this stuff flow through the gimplifier? If so
> > wouldn't that be a better place?
> >
> > If it can be done in the gimplifier, which seems good from the standpoint of
> > simplifying the long term maintenance of the checking code.
> >
> > If there's a good reason to have this front-end, please explain it.
>
> I'd say not in the gimplifier either but in varpool (symbol table) code
> where the symbols are ultimatively registered with?
Something like that?
--- a/gcc/varpool.c
+++ b/gcc/varpool.c
@@ -151,6 +151,10 @@ varpool_node_for_decl (tree decl)
node = varpool_create_empty_node ();
node->decl = decl;
symtab_register_node (node);
+
+ if (DECL_NIITIAL (decl))
+ chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
+
return node;
}
Thanks,
Ilya
>
> Richard.
>
> > Thanks,
> > Jeff
> >
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-19 13:01 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-19 13:38 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2013-11-19 21:26 ` Jeff Law
1 sibling, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Law @ 2013-11-19 21:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Biener; +Cc: Ilya Enkovich, GCC Patches
On 11/19/13 05:00, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 11/08/13 02:02, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Here is an updated patch version with no langhook.
>>>
>>> Regarding TLS objects issue - I do not think compiler should compensate
>>> the absence of instrumentation in libraries. Compiler should be responsible
>>> for initialization of Bounds Tables for .tdata section. Correct data copy
>>> is a responsibility of library. User should use either instrumented library
>>> or wrapper calls if he needs this functionality.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ilya
>>> --
>>> gcc/
>>>
>>> 2013-11-06 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>>>
>>> * c/c-parser.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
>>> (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
>>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>>> * cp/decl.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
>>> (cp_finish_decl): Register statically
>>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>>> * gimplify.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
>>> (gimplify_init_constructor): Register statically
>>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>>
>> Is parsing really the right time to register these things with the checking
>> framework? Doesn't all this stuff flow through the gimplifier? If so
>> wouldn't that be a better place?
>>
>> If it can be done in the gimplifier, which seems good from the standpoint of
>> simplifying the long term maintenance of the checking code.
>>
>> If there's a good reason to have this front-end, please explain it.
>
> I'd say not in the gimplifier either but in varpool (symbol table) code
> where the symbols are ultimatively registered with?
That'd work for me.
jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-19 13:38 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2013-11-19 21:38 ` Jeff Law
2013-11-19 21:58 ` Ilya Enkovich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Law @ 2013-11-19 21:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich, Richard Biener; +Cc: GCC Patches
On 11/19/13 05:13, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> On 19 Nov 13:00, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> On 11/08/13 02:02, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Here is an updated patch version with no langhook.
>>>>
>>>> Regarding TLS objects issue - I do not think compiler should compensate
>>>> the absence of instrumentation in libraries. Compiler should be responsible
>>>> for initialization of Bounds Tables for .tdata section. Correct data copy
>>>> is a responsibility of library. User should use either instrumented library
>>>> or wrapper calls if he needs this functionality.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Ilya
>>>> --
>>>> gcc/
>>>>
>>>> 2013-11-06 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> * c/c-parser.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
>>>> (c_parser_declaration_or_fndef): Register statically
>>>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>>>> * cp/decl.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
>>>> (cp_finish_decl): Register statically
>>>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>>>> * gimplify.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
>>>> (gimplify_init_constructor): Register statically
>>>> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>>>
>>> Is parsing really the right time to register these things with the checking
>>> framework? Doesn't all this stuff flow through the gimplifier? If so
>>> wouldn't that be a better place?
>>>
>>> If it can be done in the gimplifier, which seems good from the standpoint of
>>> simplifying the long term maintenance of the checking code.
>>>
>>> If there's a good reason to have this front-end, please explain it.
>>
>> I'd say not in the gimplifier either but in varpool (symbol table) code
>> where the symbols are ultimatively registered with?
>
> Something like that?
>
> --- a/gcc/varpool.c
> +++ b/gcc/varpool.c
> @@ -151,6 +151,10 @@ varpool_node_for_decl (tree decl)
> node = varpool_create_empty_node ();
> node->decl = decl;
> symtab_register_node (node);
> +
> + if (DECL_NIITIAL (decl))
> + chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
> +
> return node;
> }
Yea, I think that's what Richi is suggesting.
jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-19 21:38 ` Jeff Law
@ 2013-11-19 21:58 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-20 11:44 ` Richard Biener
0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2013-11-19 21:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff Law; +Cc: Richard Biener, GCC Patches
On 19 Nov 12:33, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/19/13 05:13, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> >On 19 Nov 13:00, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>I'd say not in the gimplifier either but in varpool (symbol table) code
> >>where the symbols are ultimatively registered with?
> >
> >Something like that?
> >
> >--- a/gcc/varpool.c
> >+++ b/gcc/varpool.c
> >@@ -151,6 +151,10 @@ varpool_node_for_decl (tree decl)
> > node = varpool_create_empty_node ();
> > node->decl = decl;
> > symtab_register_node (node);
> >+
> >+ if (DECL_NIITIAL (decl))
> >+ chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
> >+
> > return node;
> > }
> Yea, I think that's what Richi is suggesting.
> jeff
>
Great! Here is a full version of the patch. Bootstrap, make check and MPX tests are OK with the change.
Thanks,
Ilya
--
2013-11-19 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
* varpool.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
(varpool_node_for_decl): Register statically
initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
diff --git a/gcc/varpool.c b/gcc/varpool.c
index 471db82..8487b6e 100644
--- a/gcc/varpool.c
+++ b/gcc/varpool.c
@@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see
#include "output.h"
#include "gimple.h"
#include "flags.h"
+#include "tree-chkp.h"
/* List of hooks triggered on varpool_node events. */
struct varpool_node_hook_list {
@@ -151,6 +152,10 @@ varpool_node_for_decl (tree decl)
node = varpool_create_empty_node ();
node->decl = decl;
symtab_register_node (node);
+
+ if (DECL_INITIAL (decl))
+ chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
+
return node;
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-19 21:58 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2013-11-20 11:44 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-20 14:34 ` Ilya Enkovich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Richard Biener @ 2013-11-20 11:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich; +Cc: Jeff Law, GCC Patches
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 19 Nov 12:33, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 11/19/13 05:13, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> >On 19 Nov 13:00, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >>I'd say not in the gimplifier either but in varpool (symbol table) code
>> >>where the symbols are ultimatively registered with?
>> >
>> >Something like that?
>> >
>> >--- a/gcc/varpool.c
>> >+++ b/gcc/varpool.c
>> >@@ -151,6 +151,10 @@ varpool_node_for_decl (tree decl)
>> > node = varpool_create_empty_node ();
>> > node->decl = decl;
>> > symtab_register_node (node);
>> >+
>> >+ if (DECL_NIITIAL (decl))
>> >+ chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
>> >+
>> > return node;
>> > }
>> Yea, I think that's what Richi is suggesting.
>> jeff
>>
>
> Great! Here is a full version of the patch. Bootstrap, make check and MPX tests are OK with the change.
Please don't do this in varpool_node_for_decl but in
varpool_finalize_decl.
Richard.
> Thanks,
> Ilya
> --
> 2013-11-19 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>
> * varpool.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
> (varpool_node_for_decl): Register statically
> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
>
>
> diff --git a/gcc/varpool.c b/gcc/varpool.c
> index 471db82..8487b6e 100644
> --- a/gcc/varpool.c
> +++ b/gcc/varpool.c
> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see
> #include "output.h"
> #include "gimple.h"
> #include "flags.h"
> +#include "tree-chkp.h"
>
> /* List of hooks triggered on varpool_node events. */
> struct varpool_node_hook_list {
> @@ -151,6 +152,10 @@ varpool_node_for_decl (tree decl)
> node = varpool_create_empty_node ();
> node->decl = decl;
> symtab_register_node (node);
> +
> + if (DECL_INITIAL (decl))
> + chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
> +
> return node;
> }
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-20 11:44 ` Richard Biener
@ 2013-11-20 14:34 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-20 21:04 ` Jeff Law
0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Enkovich @ 2013-11-20 14:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Biener; +Cc: Jeff Law, GCC Patches
On 20 Nov 10:59, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 19 Nov 12:33, Jeff Law wrote:
> >> On 11/19/13 05:13, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> >> >On 19 Nov 13:00, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> >>I'd say not in the gimplifier either but in varpool (symbol table) code
> >> >>where the symbols are ultimatively registered with?
> >> >
> >> >Something like that?
> >> >
> >> >--- a/gcc/varpool.c
> >> >+++ b/gcc/varpool.c
> >> >@@ -151,6 +151,10 @@ varpool_node_for_decl (tree decl)
> >> > node = varpool_create_empty_node ();
> >> > node->decl = decl;
> >> > symtab_register_node (node);
> >> >+
> >> >+ if (DECL_NIITIAL (decl))
> >> >+ chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
> >> >+
> >> > return node;
> >> > }
> >> Yea, I think that's what Richi is suggesting.
> >> jeff
> >>
> >
> > Great! Here is a full version of the patch. Bootstrap, make check and MPX tests are OK with the change.
>
> Please don't do this in varpool_node_for_decl but in
> varpool_finalize_decl.
>
> Richard.
>
Here it is.
Thanks,
Ilya
--
gcc/
2013-11-20 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
* cgraphunit.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
(varpool_finalize_decl): Register statically
initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
diff --git a/gcc/cgraphunit.c b/gcc/cgraphunit.c
index 8ab274b..6b6ec55 100644
--- a/gcc/cgraphunit.c
+++ b/gcc/cgraphunit.c
@@ -201,6 +201,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see
#include "regset.h" /* FIXME: For reg_obstack. */
#include "context.h"
#include "pass_manager.h"
+#include "tree-chkp.h"
/* Queue of cgraph nodes scheduled to be added into cgraph. This is a
secondary queue used during optimization to accommodate passes that
@@ -830,6 +831,9 @@ varpool_finalize_decl (tree decl)
finished. */
if (cgraph_state == CGRAPH_STATE_FINISHED)
varpool_assemble_decl (node);
+
+ if (DECL_INITIAL (decl))
+ chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
}
/* EDGE is an polymorphic call. Mark all possible targets as reachable
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support
2013-11-20 14:34 ` Ilya Enkovich
@ 2013-11-20 21:04 ` Jeff Law
0 siblings, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Law @ 2013-11-20 21:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Enkovich, Richard Biener; +Cc: GCC Patches
On 11/20/13 06:49, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> On 20 Nov 10:59, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 19 Nov 12:33, Jeff Law wrote:
>>>> On 11/19/13 05:13, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>>>>> On 19 Nov 13:00, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>>>> I'd say not in the gimplifier either but in varpool (symbol table) code
>>>>>> where the symbols are ultimatively registered with?
>>>>>
>>>>> Something like that?
>>>>>
>>>>> --- a/gcc/varpool.c
>>>>> +++ b/gcc/varpool.c
>>>>> @@ -151,6 +151,10 @@ varpool_node_for_decl (tree decl)
>>>>> node = varpool_create_empty_node ();
>>>>> node->decl = decl;
>>>>> symtab_register_node (node);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (DECL_NIITIAL (decl))
>>>>> + chkp_register_var_initializer (decl);
>>>>> +
>>>>> return node;
>>>>> }
>>>> Yea, I think that's what Richi is suggesting.
>>>> jeff
>>>>
>>>
>>> Great! Here is a full version of the patch. Bootstrap, make check and MPX tests are OK with the change.
>>
>> Please don't do this in varpool_node_for_decl but in
>> varpool_finalize_decl.
>>
>> Richard.
>>
>
> Here it is.
>
> Thanks,
> Ilya
> --
>
> gcc/
>
> 2013-11-20 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com>
>
> * cgraphunit.c: Include tree-chkp.h.
> (varpool_finalize_decl): Register statically
> initialized decls in Pointer Bounds Checker.
This is fine. Note Richi's request to postpone this feature means this
can't go in until the next stage1. However, at that time, the approved
hunks can be updated for the trunk and go in. Ideally we'll have all
the hunks reviewed and ready to go before then -- though once the
current stage1 closes, everyone will be much more focused on bugfixing.
jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-11-20 19:05 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-10-31 10:27 [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-01 22:05 ` Joseph S. Myers
2013-11-05 12:55 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-05 13:05 ` Jakub Jelinek
2013-11-05 13:14 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-05 13:20 ` Jakub Jelinek
2013-11-05 13:28 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-04 10:48 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-05 13:03 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-05 13:14 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-05 13:23 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-05 13:30 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-05 13:39 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-05 13:45 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-05 14:09 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-06 10:55 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-06 10:58 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-06 11:31 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-08 9:10 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-18 10:37 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-18 17:58 ` Jeff Law
2013-11-19 13:01 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-19 13:38 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-19 21:38 ` Jeff Law
2013-11-19 21:58 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-20 11:44 ` Richard Biener
2013-11-20 14:34 ` Ilya Enkovich
2013-11-20 21:04 ` Jeff Law
2013-11-19 21:26 ` Jeff Law
2013-11-18 20:32 ` (g)fortran support for MPX (was: Re: [PATCH, MPX, 2/X] Pointers Checker [8/25] Languages support) Tobias Burnus
2013-11-18 22:40 ` Ilya Enkovich
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).