From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F92738930C2 for ; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 16:04:23 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 9F92738930C2 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098413.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 13QG2uCg170986; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 12:04:23 -0400 Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 385xg159mr-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 26 Apr 2021 12:04:23 -0400 Received: from m0098413.ppops.net (m0098413.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 13QG30YV172074; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 12:04:22 -0400 Received: from ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com (1b.90.2fa9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.47.144.27]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 385xg159mh-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 26 Apr 2021 12:04:22 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 13QFrG62002785; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 16:04:22 GMT Received: from b01cxnp23033.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp23033.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.28]) by ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 384ay979r1-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 26 Apr 2021 16:04:22 +0000 Received: from b01ledav004.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav004.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.109]) by b01cxnp23033.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 13QG4Llh34013648 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 26 Apr 2021 16:04:21 GMT Received: from b01ledav004.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B329112066; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 16:04:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav004.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 575A5112062; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 16:04:20 +0000 (GMT) Received: from lexx (unknown [9.163.27.240]) by b01ledav004.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 16:04:20 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <7118acced8c2c6a60d86cceff306ac55dfcdb115.camel@vnet.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] rs6000: Add ROP tests From: will schmidt To: Bill Schmidt , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: dje.gcc@gmail.com, segher@kernel.crashing.org Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2021 11:04:19 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4adcb20b3d2d578fe6f34a9b5cd400f9999b54f5.1619400506.git.wschmidt@linux.ibm.com> References: <4adcb20b3d2d578fe6f34a9b5cd400f9999b54f5.1619400506.git.wschmidt@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-10.el7) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: dg3QpxIuvpTdFUKSgQy28fiZVa2Zja5K X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 9qs-OkVEX5cHDdkOERoXZY790185CpoZ X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391, 18.0.761 definitions=2021-04-26_08:2021-04-26, 2021-04-26 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2104060000 definitions=main-2104260122 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_EF, GIT_PATCH_0, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2021 16:04:25 -0000 On Sun, 2021-04-25 at 20:50 -0500, Bill Schmidt via Gcc-patches wrote: > 2021-03-25 Bill Schmidt > > gcc/testsuite/ > * gcc.target/powerpc/rop-1.c: New. > * gcc.target/powerpc/rop-2.c: New. > * gcc.target/powerpc/rop-3.c: New. > * gcc.target/powerpc/rop-4.c: New. > * gcc.target/powerpc/rop-5.c: New. ok > --- > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-1.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-2.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-3.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-4.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-5.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++ > 5 files changed, 82 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-1.c > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-2.c > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-3.c > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-4.c > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-5.c > > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-1.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..cf8e2b01dda > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-1.c > @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mdejagnu-cpu=power10 -mrop-protect" } */ > + > +/* Verify that ROP-protect instructions are inserted when a > + call is present. */ > + > +extern void foo (void); > + > +int bar () > +{ > + foo (); > + return 5; > +} > + > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\mhashst\M} } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\mhashchk\M} } } */ ok > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-2.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..dde403b0ef5 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-2.c > @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mdejagnu-cpu=power10 -mrop-protect -mprivileged" } */ > + > +/* Verify that privileged ROP-protect instructions are inserted when a > + call is present. */ > + > +extern void foo (void); > + > +int bar () > +{ > + foo (); > + return 5; > +} > + > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\mhashstp\M} } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\mhashchkp\M} } } */ ok > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-3.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-3.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..054f94fda99 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-3.c > @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ > +/* { dg-do run { target { power10_hw } } } */ > +/* { dg-require-effective-target power10_ok } */ > +/* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_elfv2 } */ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mdejagnu-cpu=power10 -mrop-protect" } */ > + > +/* Verify that ROP-protect instructions execute correctly when a > + call is present. */ > + > +void __attribute__((noinline)) foo () > +{ > + asm (""); > +} > + > +int main () > +{ > + foo (); > + return 0; > +} > + ok > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-4.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-4.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..e2be8b2c035 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-4.c > @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mdejagnu-cpu=power10 -mrop-protect" } */ > + > +/* Verify that no ROP-protect instructions are inserted when no > + call is present. */ > + > + > +int bar () > +{ > + return 5; > +} > + > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not {\mhashst\M} } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not {\mhashchk\M} } } */ ok > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-5.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-5.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..b759fa59979 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/rop-5.c > @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ > +/* { dg-do run { target { power10_hw } } } */ > +/* { dg-require-effective-target power10_ok } */ > +/* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_elfv2 } */ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mdejagnu-cpu=power10 -mrop-protect" } */ > + > +/* Verify that __ROP_PROTECT__ is predefined for -mrop-protect. */ > + > +extern void abort (void); > + > +int main () > +{ > +#ifndef __ROP_PROTECT__ > + abort (); > +#endif > + return 0; > +} > + ok. Does there need to be another test to verify if -mrop-protect is on by default without specifying -mrop-protect? (or is it?) Question on 0/4. with that noted, lgtm, thanks, -will