0003-Part-3.-Add-tests-for-finstrument-control-flow-and-notrack attribute

0003-Part-3.-Add-tests-for-finstrument-control-flow-and-notrack attribute

[Tsimbalist, Igor V]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 74 bytes --]

Part#3. Add tests for -finstrument-control-flow and notrack attribute.


[-- Attachment #2: 0003-Part-3.-Add-tests-for-finstrument-control-flow-and-n.patch --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 3198 bytes --]

From 7869de8a0c0ec55c4e9240c2483fefee97bf34c9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Igor Tsimbalist <igor.v.tsimbalist@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2017 17:29:08 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 3/9] Part#3. Add tests for -finstrument-control-flow and
 notrack attribute.

gcc/testsuite/

	* c-c++-common/finstrument-control-flow.c: New test.
	* c-c++-common/notrack-1.c: Likewise.
	* c-c++-common/notrack-2.c: Likewise.
---
 .../c-c++-common/finstrument-control-flow.c        |  4 +++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/notrack-1.c             | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/notrack-2.c             |  5 ++++
 3 files changed, 39 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/finstrument-control-flow.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/notrack-1.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/notrack-2.c
---
 .../c-c++-common/finstrument-control-flow.c        |  4 +++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/notrack-1.c             | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/notrack-2.c             |  5 ++++
 3 files changed, 39 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/finstrument-control-flow.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/notrack-1.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/notrack-2.c

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/finstrument-control-flow.c b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/finstrument-control-flow.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fa6d763
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/finstrument-control-flow.c
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-finstrument-control-flow" } */
+/* { dg-error "'-finstrument-control-flow' requires CET support on this target. Use -mcet or one of -mibt, -mshstk options to enable CET." "" { target { "i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*" } } 0 } */
+/* { dg-error "'-finstrument-control-flow' is not supported for this target" "" { target { ! "i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*" } } 0 } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/notrack-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/notrack-1.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..75075fb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/notrack-1.c
@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+
+int func (int) __attribute__ ((notrack));
+int (*fptr) (int) __attribute__ ((notrack));
+typedef void (*notrack_t) (void) __attribute__ ((notrack));
+
+int
+foo1 (int arg)
+{
+  return func (arg) + fptr (arg);
+}
+
+void
+foo2 (void (*foo) (void))
+{
+  void (*func) (void) __attribute__((notrack)) = foo;
+  func ();
+}
+
+void
+foo3 (notrack_t foo)
+{
+  foo ();
+}
+
+void
+foo4 (void (*foo) (void) __attribute__((notrack)))
+{
+  foo ();
+}
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/notrack-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/notrack-2.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..95ea4ed
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/notrack-2.c
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+
+int var1 __attribute__((notrack)); /* { dg-warning "'notrack' attribute only applies to function types" } */
+int *var2 __attribute__((notrack)); /* { dg-warning "'notrack' attribute only applies to function types" } */
+void (**var3) (void) __attribute__((notrack)); /* { dg-warning "'notrack' attribute only applies to function types" } */
-- 
1.8.3.1

Re: 0003-Part-3.-Add-tests-for-finstrument-control-flow-and-notrack attribute

[Jeff Law]

On 08/01/2017 02:56 AM, Tsimbalist, Igor V wrote:
> Part#3. Add tests for -finstrument-control-flow and notrack attribute.
> 
> 
> 0003-Part-3.-Add-tests-for-finstrument-control-flow-and-n.patch
> 
> 
> From 7869de8a0c0ec55c4e9240c2483fefee97bf34c9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Igor Tsimbalist <igor.v.tsimbalist@intel.com>
> Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2017 17:29:08 +0300
> Subject: [PATCH 3/9] Part#3. Add tests for -finstrument-control-flow and
>  notrack attribute.
> 
> gcc/testsuite/
> 
> 	* c-c++-common/finstrument-control-flow.c: New test.
> 	* c-c++-common/notrack-1.c: Likewise.
> 	* c-c++-common/notrack-2.c: Likewise.
No concerns with the existing tests.

We should consider an ICF test as I outlined in an earlier message.

We should also consider tests where we drop/add the notrack attribute as
ISTM we ought to be getting warnings in those cases.

Finally, you should consider tests in gcc.target/i386 that verify we
generate the proper instrumentation for a  few tests.

jeff

RE: 0003-Part-3.-Add-tests-for-finstrument-control-flow-and-notrack attribute

[Tsimbalist, Igor V]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2284 bytes --]

Here is an updated patch (version #2). Mainly attribute and option  names were changed.
The test for ICF will be introduced in x86 specific tests (patch 0006-Part-6) as the implementation
checks if the CF instrumentation is on to adjust a hash based on 'nocf'_check' attribute presence.
In generic part CF instrumentation is off as no implementation exist.

The patch for x86 specific tests (patch 0006-Part-6) is being reviewed by Uros.

gcc/testsuite/
	* c-c++-common/fcf-protection-1.c: New test.
	* c-c++-common/fcf-protection-2.c: Likewise.
	* c-c++-common/fcf-protection-3.c: Likewise.
	* c-c++-common/fcf-protection-4.c: Likewise.
	* c-c++-common/fcf-protection-5.c: Likewise.
	* c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-1.c: Likewise.
	* c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-2.c: Likewise.
	* c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-3.c: Likewise.

Is it ok for trunk?

Thanks,
Igor


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Law [mailto:law@redhat.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 25, 2017 11:01 PM
> To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbalist@intel.com>; 'gcc-
> patches@gcc.gnu.org' <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
> Subject: Re: 0003-Part-3.-Add-tests-for-finstrument-control-flow-and-
> notrack attribute
> 
> On 08/01/2017 02:56 AM, Tsimbalist, Igor V wrote:
> > Part#3. Add tests for -finstrument-control-flow and notrack attribute.
> >
> >
> > 0003-Part-3.-Add-tests-for-finstrument-control-flow-and-n.patch
> >
> >
> > From 7869de8a0c0ec55c4e9240c2483fefee97bf34c9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> 2001
> > From: Igor Tsimbalist <igor.v.tsimbalist@intel.com>
> > Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2017 17:29:08 +0300
> > Subject: [PATCH 3/9] Part#3. Add tests for -finstrument-control-flow
> > and  notrack attribute.
> >
> > gcc/testsuite/
> >
> > 	* c-c++-common/finstrument-control-flow.c: New test.
> > 	* c-c++-common/notrack-1.c: Likewise.
> > 	* c-c++-common/notrack-2.c: Likewise.
> No concerns with the existing tests.
> 
> We should consider an ICF test as I outlined in an earlier message.
> 
> We should also consider tests where we drop/add the notrack attribute as
> ISTM we ought to be getting warnings in those cases.
> 
> Finally, you should consider tests in gcc.target/i386 that verify we generate
> the proper instrumentation for a  few tests.
> 
> jeff


[-- Attachment #2: 0003-Add-tests-for-fcf-protection-and-nocf_check-attribut.patch --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 7978 bytes --]

From 700d44c245e68fb4ce61f842f1bd83c5f0954954 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Igor Tsimbalist <igor.v.tsimbalist@intel.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2017 19:24:03 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] Add tests for -fcf-protection and nocf_check attribute.

gcc/testsuite/

	* c-c++-common/fcf-protection-1.c: New test.
	* c-c++-common/fcf-protection-2.c: Likewise.
	* c-c++-common/fcf-protection-3.c: Likewise.
	* c-c++-common/fcf-protection-4.c: Likewise.
	* c-c++-common/fcf-protection-5.c: Likewise.
	* c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-1.c: Likewise.
	* c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-2.c: Likewise.
	* c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-3.c: Likewise.
---
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-1.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-2.c |  5 +++++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-3.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-1.c  |  4 ++++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-2.c  |  4 ++++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-3.c  |  4 ++++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-4.c  |  4 ++++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-5.c  |  4 ++++
 8 files changed, 84 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-1.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-2.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-3.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-1.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-2.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-3.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-4.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-5.c
---
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-1.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-2.c |  5 +++++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-3.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-1.c  |  4 ++++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-2.c  |  4 ++++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-3.c  |  4 ++++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-4.c  |  4 ++++
 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-5.c  |  4 ++++
 8 files changed, 84 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-1.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-2.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-3.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-1.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-2.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-3.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-4.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-5.c

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-1.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dfccd78
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-1.c
@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+
+int func (int) __attribute__ ((nocf_check));
+int (*fptr) (int) __attribute__ ((nocf_check));
+typedef void (*nocf_check_t) (void) __attribute__ ((nocf_check));
+
+int
+foo1 (int arg)
+{
+  return func (arg) + fptr (arg);
+}
+
+void
+foo2 (void (*foo) (void))
+{
+  void (*func) (void) __attribute__((nocf_check)) = foo; /* { dg-warning "nocf_check attribute mismatch for initialization" } */
+  func ();
+}
+
+void
+foo3 (nocf_check_t foo)
+{
+  foo ();
+}
+
+void
+foo4 (void (*foo) (void) __attribute__((nocf_check)))
+{
+  foo ();
+}
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-2.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9ab0180
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-2.c
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+
+int var1 __attribute__((nocf_check)); /* { dg-warning "'nocf_check' attribute only applies to function types" } */
+int *var2 __attribute__((nocf_check)); /* { dg-warning "'nocf_check' attribute only applies to function types" } */
+void (**var3) (void) __attribute__((nocf_check)); /* { dg-warning "'nocf_check' attribute only applies to function types" } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-3.c b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-3.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d8d4c82
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-3.c
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+
+int  foo (void) __attribute__ ((nocf_check));
+void (*foo1) (void) __attribute__((nocf_check));
+void (*foo2) (void);
+
+int
+foo (void) /* The function's address is not tracked.  */
+{
+  /* This call site is not tracked for
+     control-flow instrumentation.  */
+  (*foo1)();
+
+  foo1 = foo2; /* { dg-warning "nocf_check attribute mismatch for assignment" } */
+  /* This call site is still not tracked for
+     control-flow instrumentation.  */
+  (*foo1)();
+
+  /* This call site is tracked for
+     control-flow instrumentation.  */
+  (*foo2)();
+
+  foo2 = foo1; /* { dg-warning "nocf_check attribute mismatch for assignment" } */
+  /* This call site is still tracked for
+     control-flow instrumentation.  */
+  (*foo2)();
+
+  return 0;
+}
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-1.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6a27e19
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-1.c
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-fcf-protection=full" } */
+/* { dg-error "'-fcf-protection=full' is not supported for this target" "" { target { "i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*" } } 0 } */
+/* { dg-error "'-fcf-protection=full' is not supported for this target" "" { target { ! "i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*" } } 0 } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-2.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..558f4c0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-2.c
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-fcf-protection=branch" } */
+/* { dg-error "'-fcf-protection=branch' is not supported for this target" "" { target { "i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*" } } 0 } */
+/* { dg-error "'-fcf-protection=branch' is not supported for this target" "" { target { ! "i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*" } } 0 } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-3.c b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-3.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ffc7346
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-3.c
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-fcf-protection=return" } */
+/* { dg-error "'-fcf-protection=return' is not supported for this target" "" { target { "i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*" } } 0 } */
+/* { dg-error "'-fcf-protection=return' is not supported for this target" "" { target { ! "i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*" } } 0 } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-4.c b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-4.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1a5b1b8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-4.c
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-fcf-protection=none" } */
+/* { dg-bogus "'-fcf-protection=none' is not supported for this target" "" { target { "i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*" } } 0 } */
+/* { dg-bogus "'-fcf-protection=none' is not supported for this target" "" { target { ! "i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*" } } 0 } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-5.c b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-5.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2ea2ce0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fcf-protection-5.c
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-fcf-protection" } */
+/* { dg-error "'-fcf-protection=full' is not supported for this target" "" { target { "i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*" } } 0 } */
+/* { dg-error "'-fcf-protection=full' is not supported for this target" "" { target { ! "i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*" } } 0 } */
-- 
1.8.3.1

Re: 0003-Part-3.-Add-tests-for-finstrument-control-flow-and-notrack attribute

[Jeff Law]

On 09/19/2017 07:58 AM, Tsimbalist, Igor V wrote:
> Here is an updated patch (version #2). Mainly attribute and option  names were changed.
> The test for ICF will be introduced in x86 specific tests (patch 0006-Part-6) as the implementation
> checks if the CF instrumentation is on to adjust a hash based on 'nocf'_check' attribute presence.
> In generic part CF instrumentation is off as no implementation exist.
> 
> The patch for x86 specific tests (patch 0006-Part-6) is being reviewed by Uros.
> 
> gcc/testsuite/
> 	* c-c++-common/fcf-protection-1.c: New test.
> 	* c-c++-common/fcf-protection-2.c: Likewise.
> 	* c-c++-common/fcf-protection-3.c: Likewise.
> 	* c-c++-common/fcf-protection-4.c: Likewise.
> 	* c-c++-common/fcf-protection-5.c: Likewise.
> 	* c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-1.c: Likewise.
> 	* c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-2.c: Likewise.
> 	* c-c++-common/attr-nocf-check-3.c: Likewise.
> 
> Is it ok for trunk?
>
This is OK once the CET changes for the compiler are approved.

Jeff