From: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
To: Alexander Monakov <amonakov@ispras.ru>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] do not tailcall __sanitizer_cov_trace_pc [PR90746]
Date: Wed, 3 May 2023 08:04:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFiYyc3gN9CZFu0znWnya+kp2QNJ7kc89s7RNpyL4t3T0KdoLw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230502144504.14654-1-amonakov@ispras.ru>
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 4:45 PM Alexander Monakov via Gcc-patches
<gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
> When instrumentation is requested via -fsanitize-coverage=trace-pc, GCC
> emits calls to __sanitizer_cov_trace_pc callback into each basic block.
> This callback is supposed to be implemented by the user, and should be
> able to identify the containing basic block by inspecting its return
> address. Tailcalling the callback prevents that, so disallow it.
LGTM
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> PR sanitizer/90746
> * calls.cc (can_implement_as_sibling_call_p): Reject calls
> to __sanitizer_cov_trace_pc.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> PR sanitizer/90746
> * gcc.dg/sancov/basic0.c: Verify absence of tailcall.
> ---
> gcc/calls.cc | 10 ++++++++++
> gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/sancov/basic0.c | 4 +++-
> 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/calls.cc b/gcc/calls.cc
> index 4d7f6c3d2..c6ed2f189 100644
> --- a/gcc/calls.cc
> +++ b/gcc/calls.cc
> @@ -2541,6 +2541,16 @@ can_implement_as_sibling_call_p (tree exp,
> return false;
> }
>
> + /* __sanitizer_cov_trace_pc is supposed to inspect its return address
> + to identify the caller, and therefore should not be tailcalled. */
> + if (fndecl && DECL_BUILT_IN_CLASS (fndecl) == BUILT_IN_NORMAL
> + && DECL_FUNCTION_CODE (fndecl) == BUILT_IN_SANITIZER_COV_TRACE_PC)
> + {
> + /* No need for maybe_complain_about_tail_call here: the call
> + is synthesized by the compiler. */
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> /* If the called function is nested in the current one, it might access
> some of the caller's arguments, but could clobber them beforehand if
> the argument areas are shared. */
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/sancov/basic0.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/sancov/basic0.c
> index af69b2d12..dfdaea848 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/sancov/basic0.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/sancov/basic0.c
> @@ -1,9 +1,11 @@
> /* Basic test on number of inserted callbacks. */
> /* { dg-do compile } */
> -/* { dg-options "-fsanitize-coverage=trace-pc -fdump-tree-optimized" } */
> +/* { dg-options "-fsanitize-coverage=trace-pc -fdump-tree-optimized -fdump-rtl-expand" } */
>
> void foo(void)
> {
> }
>
> /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "__builtin___sanitizer_cov_trace_pc \\(\\)" 1 "optimized" } } */
> +/* The built-in should not be tail-called: */
> +/* { dg-final { scan-rtl-dump-not "call_insn/j" "expand" } } */
> --
> 2.39.2
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-03 6:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-02 14:45 Alexander Monakov
2023-05-03 6:04 ` Richard Biener [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAFiYyc3gN9CZFu0znWnya+kp2QNJ7kc89s7RNpyL4t3T0KdoLw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
--cc=amonakov@ispras.ru \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).