From: Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: richard.earnshaw@arm.com, marcus.shawcroft@arm.com,
kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com
Subject: [committed] aarch64: Add a couple of extra stack-protector tests
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 19:23:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mpt4knofj2n.fsf@arm.com> (raw)
These tests were inspired by corresponding arm ones. They already pass.
Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu and aarch64_be-elf, pushed to master.
Richard
gcc/testsuite/
* gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-3.c: New test.
* gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-4.c: Likewise.
---
.../gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-3.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++
.../gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-4.c | 6 +++
2 files changed, 51 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-3.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-4.c
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-3.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-3.c
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..909e26c4c0a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-3.c
@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+/* { dg-do run } */
+/* { dg-require-effective-target fstack_protector } */
+/* { dg-options "-fstack-protector-all -O2" } */
+
+extern volatile long *stack_chk_guard_ptr;
+
+void __attribute__ ((noipa))
+f (void)
+{
+ volatile int x;
+ /* Munging the contents of __stack_chk_guard should trigger a
+ stack-smashing failure for this function. */
+ *stack_chk_guard_ptr += 1;
+}
+
+#define CHECK(REG) "\tcmp\tx0, " #REG "\n\tbeq\t1f\n"
+
+asm (
+" .pushsection .data\n"
+" .align 3\n"
+"stack_chk_guard_ptr:\n"
+#if __ILP32__
+" .word __stack_chk_guard\n"
+#else
+" .xword __stack_chk_guard\n"
+#endif
+" .weak __stack_chk_guard\n"
+"__stack_chk_guard:\n"
+" .word 0xdead4321\n"
+" .word 0xbeef8765\n"
+" .text\n"
+" .type __stack_chk_fail, %function\n"
+"__stack_chk_fail:\n"
+" mov x0, #0\n"
+" b exit\n"
+" .size __stack_chk_fail, .-__stack_chk_fail\n"
+" .popsection"
+);
+
+int
+main (void)
+{
+ f ();
+ __builtin_abort ();
+}
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-4.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-4.c
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..6334dd00908
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/stack-protector-4.c
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+/* { dg-do run } */
+/* { dg-require-effective-target fstack_protector } */
+/* { dg-require-effective-target fpic } */
+/* { dg-options "-fstack-protector-all -O2 -fpic" } */
+
+#include "stack-protector-3.c"
reply other threads:[~2020-09-23 18:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=mpt4knofj2n.fsf@arm.com \
--to=richard.sandiford@arm.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com \
--cc=marcus.shawcroft@arm.com \
--cc=richard.earnshaw@arm.com \
/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).