From: Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: "Wilco Dijkstra" <Wilco.Dijkstra@arm.com>,
"Martin Liška" <mliska@suse.cz>,
"Kyrylo Tkachov" <Kyrylo.Tkachov@arm.com>,
"Szabolcs Nagy" <Szabolcs.Nagy@arm.com>,
"GCC Patches" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libgcc: Fix uninitialized RA signing on AArch64 [PR107678]
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2023 15:40:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mpty1q7vk0g.fsf@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y8AofgFEZ0sfiGan@tucnak> (Jakub Jelinek's message of "Thu, 12 Jan 2023 16:34:22 +0100")
Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 03:22:56PM +0000, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> If we have a new enum, I think we should handle it explicitly. The fact
>> that the information isn't propagated between frames is a key part of
>> the semantics.
>>
>> >> Another option is to just define the arch dependent value for how field
>> >> in the arch code, right now it is unsigned char type, so using say
>> >> (unsigned char) ~0 or (unsigned char) ~0 and (unsigned char) ~1 as arch
>> >> specific values might be ok too.
>> >
>> > Yet another option would be to define 1-2 extra REG_ values in the generic
>> > unwind-dw2.h header, but name them
>> > REG_ARCH_SPECIFIC_1,
>> > REG_ARCH_SPECIFIC_2,
>> > or so, and then the machine specific code can
>> > #define REG_AARCH64_TOGGLE_ON REG_ARCH_SPECIFIC_1
>> > Of course, all this depends on whether the arch specific codes can be
>> > handled in uw_update_context_1 by doing break; there and nothing else.
>>
>> Yeah, personally I'd prefer for target-independent code to provide
>> the toggle representation, even if it isn't widely used.
>
> I can live even with that, I just hope it won't make code generation worse
> on other targets.
> Anyway, I understood aarch64 needs 2 states for the signing, so one would
> be REG_TOGGLE_ON and the other anything else?
The other is the default (no signing), so it needs to be REG_UNSAVED.
> Users can always create (invalid?) unwind info where they save the magic
> register, make it undefined etc.
>
> And
> void bar (void), baz (void), boo (void), qux (void), corge (void);
> enum {
> REG_UNSAVED,
> REG_SAVED_OFFSET,
> REG_SAVED_REG,
> REG_SAVED_EXP,
> REG_SAVED_VAL_OFFSET,
> REG_SAVED_VAL_EXP,
> REG_UNDEFINED
> #ifdef ANOTHER
> , REG_TOGGLE_ON
> #endif
> };
>
> void
> foo (unsigned char c)
> {
> switch (c)
> {
> case REG_UNSAVED:
> case REG_UNDEFINED:
> #ifdef ANOTHER
> case REG_TOGGLE_ON:
> #endif
> break;
>
> case REG_SAVED_OFFSET:
> bar ();
> break;
>
> case REG_SAVED_REG:
> baz ();
> break;
>
> case REG_SAVED_EXP:
> boo ();
> break;
>
> case REG_SAVED_VAL_OFFSET:
> qux ();
> break;
>
> case REG_SAVED_VAL_EXP:
> corge ();
> break;
> }
> }
> suggests that it doesn't, already cfg pass turns the implicit default:
> into something that covers even the REG_UNSAVED, REG_UNDEFINED and maybe
> REG_TOGGLE_ON values into default:
OK, that's good. Maybe having it behind a macro wouldn't be too bad though,
if it comes to that.
Thanks,
Richard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-12 15:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-01 16:55 Wilco Dijkstra
2022-12-05 19:04 ` Richard Sandiford
2022-12-06 10:50 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2022-12-06 11:58 ` Wilco Dijkstra
2022-12-06 21:33 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2023-01-03 17:27 ` Wilco Dijkstra
2023-01-05 14:57 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2023-01-10 16:33 ` Wilco Dijkstra
2023-01-10 18:12 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-01-11 11:33 ` Martin Liška
2023-01-11 11:59 ` Wilco Dijkstra
2023-01-12 10:49 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-01-12 12:05 ` Richard Sandiford
2023-01-12 12:08 ` Richard Sandiford
2023-01-12 12:28 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-01-12 14:39 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-01-12 15:22 ` Richard Sandiford
2023-01-12 15:34 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-01-12 15:40 ` Richard Sandiford [this message]
2023-01-12 18:57 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-01-16 13:04 ` Martin Liška
2023-01-17 19:49 ` Wilco Dijkstra
2023-01-17 20:43 ` Richard Sandiford
2023-01-18 12:49 ` Wilco Dijkstra
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=mpty1q7vk0g.fsf@arm.com \
--to=richard.sandiford@arm.com \
--cc=Kyrylo.Tkachov@arm.com \
--cc=Szabolcs.Nagy@arm.com \
--cc=Wilco.Dijkstra@arm.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=mliska@suse.cz \
/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).