From: Tristan Gingold <gingold@adacore.com>
To: Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>
Cc: binutils@sourceware.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: RFC: Prevent disassembly beyond symbolic boundaries
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 07:13:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D81F97D-90EA-4769-8381-514BB6E81E3F@adacore.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87lhfhynoz.fsf@redhat.com>
Nick,
> Currently objdump will disassemble beyond a symbolic boundary if it
> needs extra bytes to decode an instruction. For example (with x86):
>
> .file "foo.c"
> .text
> .globl foo
> .type foo, @function
> foo:
> .byte 0x24
> .byte 0x2f
> .byte 0x83
> .size foo, .-foo
>
> .globl bar
> .type bar, @function
> bar:
> .byte 0x0f
> .byte 0xba
> .byte 0xe2
> .byte 0x03
> .size bar, .-bar
>
> This will disassemble as:
>
> 0000000000000000 <foo>:
> 0: 24 2f and $0x2f,%al
> 2: 83 0f ba orl $0xffffffba,(%rdi)
>
> 0000000000000003 <bar>:
> 3: 0f ba e2 03 bt $0x3,%edx
>
> Note how the instruction decoded at address 0x2 has stolen two bytes
> from "foo", but these bytes are also decoded (correctly this time) as
> part of the first instruction of foo.
>
> I have a patch (attached) which changes this behaviour, so that the
> disassembly would be:
>
> 0: 24 2f and $0x2f,%al
> 2: 83 .byte 0x83
>
> 00000003 <bar>:
> 3: 0f ba e2 03 bt $0x3,%edx
[…]
> What do people think ? To me this seems like a good idea, but I
> willing to consider alternative suggestions if people have them.
I am curious. Why do you think it was a problem ?
Even if there is a symbol in the middle of an instruction, I’d like
to understand what the processor will execute. Before the proposed
change, it was possible, but after it isn’t easy anymore.
(But I agree I never met this issue. I am just curious here).
Tristan.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-19 7:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-18 16:40 Nick Clifton
2015-06-19 7:13 ` Tristan Gingold [this message]
2015-06-19 11:41 ` Nicholas Clifton
2015-06-19 16:33 ` Tristan Gingold
2015-06-22 16:13 ` Nicholas Clifton
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=3D81F97D-90EA-4769-8381-514BB6E81E3F@adacore.com \
--to=gingold@adacore.com \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=nickc@redhat.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).