On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 01:14:31PM -0400, Diego Novillo wrote:
>> On 2012-10-11 12:38 , Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>
>> >- gimple_seq seq, stmts;
>> >- tree shadow_type = size_in_bytes == 16 ?
>> >- short_integer_type_node : char_type_node;
>> >- tree shadow_ptr_type = build_pointer_type (shadow_type);
>> >- tree uintptr_type = lang_hooks.types.type_for_mode (ptr_mode,
>> >- /*unsignedp=*/true);
>> >+ tree shadow_ptr_type = shadow_ptr_types[size_in_bytes == 16];
>>
>> Add '? 1 : 0' in the array index expression.
>
> Ok.
>
>> > /* Build
>> >- (base_addr >> ASAN_SHADOW_SHIFT) | targetm.asan_shadow_offset (). */
>> >+ (base_addr >> ASAN_SHADOW_SHIFT) + targetm.asan_shadow_offset (). */
>>
>> Hm, I wonder if this is a documentation problem or we're generating
>> bad runtime code. Wei, you tested the runtime and it was working
>> with the GCC generated code, right?
>
> The asan web pages document |, the old tree-asan.c emitted +, I've changed
> it to BIT_IOR_EXPR, but that resulted in worse assembly, and I believe at
> least for the current x86_64 and i686 address ranges and shadow offset
> values it actually doesn't matter.
> On x86_64 stack is like 0x7ffff6e00000, shifted down by 3 is still smaller
> than 1L << 44 that is ored or added to it. And the negative half of the
> address space is used by the kernel, nothing is mapped into it (besides
> vsyscall page) and neither | nor + of 1L << 44 to it would work well.
> On i386, | and + works the same for all addresses, as 0xffffffffU >> 3
> is still smaller than 1 << 29.
> The reason why + generates better code on x86_64/i686 is that one can use
> e.g. movzbl (%r1, %r2), %r3 instead of orq %r2, %r1; movzb (%r1), %r3.
>
>> >+ if (shadow_ptr_types[0] == NULL_TREE)
>> >+ {
>> >+ alias_set_type set = new_alias_set ();
>> >+ shadow_ptr_types[0]
>> >+ = build_distinct_type_copy (unsigned_char_type_node);
>> >+ TYPE_ALIAS_SET (shadow_ptr_types[0]) = set;
>> >+ shadow_ptr_types[0] = build_pointer_type (shadow_ptr_types[0]);
>> >+ shadow_ptr_types[1]
>> >+ = build_distinct_type_copy (short_unsigned_type_node);
>> >+ TYPE_ALIAS_SET (shadow_ptr_types[1]) = set;
>> >+ shadow_ptr_types[1] = build_pointer_type (shadow_ptr_types[1]);
>> >+ }
>>
>> Move this to an initialization function, please.
>
> Okay.
That doesn't work with LTO btw, so make sure you instrument during LTRANS.
Richard.
> Jakub
