[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] MachineVerifier: Check stack protector is top-most in frame (PR #122635)
https://github.com/guy-david edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122635 ___ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [AddressSanitizer] Remove memory effects from functions (PR #130495)
https://github.com/guy-david edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/130495 ___ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [AddressSanitizer] Remove memory effects from functions (PR #130495)
https://github.com/guy-david edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/130495 ___ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [AddressSanitizer] Remove memory effects from functions (PR #130495)
@@ -612,6 +612,48 @@ void getAddressSanitizerParams(const Triple &TargetTriple,
int LongSize,
*OrShadowOffset = Mapping.OrShadowOffset;
}
+void removeASanIncompatibleFnAttributes(Function &F, bool RemoveWriteOnly) {
+ // Remove memory attributes that are invalid with ASan and HWSan.
+ // ASan checks read from shadow, which invalidates memory(argmem: *)
+ // Short granule checks on function arguments read from the argument memory
+ // (last byte of the granule), which invalidates writeonly.
+ //
+ // This is not only true for sanitized functions, because AttrInfer can
+ // infer those attributes on libc functions, which is not true if those
+ // are instrumented (Android) or intercepted.
+ //
+ // We might want to model ASan shadow memory more opaquely to get rid of
+ // this problem altogether, by hiding the shadow memory write in an
+ // intrinsic, essentially like in the AArch64StackTagging pass. But that's
+ // for another day.
+
+ // The API is weird. `onlyReadsMemory` actually means "does not write", and
+ // `onlyWritesMemory` actually means "does not read". So we reconstruct
+ // "accesses memory" && "does not read" <=> "writes".
+ bool Changed = false;
+ if (!F.doesNotAccessMemory()) {
+bool WritesMemory = !F.onlyReadsMemory();
+bool ReadsMemory = !F.onlyWritesMemory();
+if ((WritesMemory && !ReadsMemory) || F.onlyAccessesArgMemory()) {
+ F.removeFnAttr(Attribute::Memory);
+ Changed = true;
+}
+ }
+ if (RemoveWriteOnly) {
+for (Argument &A : F.args()) {
+ if (A.hasAttribute(Attribute::WriteOnly)) {
+A.removeAttr(Attribute::WriteOnly);
+Changed = true;
+ }
+}
+ }
+ if (Changed) {
+// nobuiltin makes sure later passes don't restore assumptions about
+// the function.
+F.addFnAttr(Attribute::NoBuiltin);
+ }
+}
guy-david wrote:
I'm not completely following, can you explain what it means to "operate in
terms of Memory"?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/130495
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MachineSink] Lower SplitEdgeProbabilityThreshold (PR #127666)
https://github.com/guy-david edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127666 ___ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MachineSink] Lower SplitEdgeProbabilityThreshold (PR #127666)
https://github.com/guy-david edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127666 ___ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [PHIElimination] Reuse existing COPY in predecessor basic block (Take Two) (PR #146806)
guy-david wrote: @mikaelholmen @mstorsjo @macurtis-amd @sjoerdmeijer @sushgokh We've decided that it's best to revert the original PR (see https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/146850), sorry for wasting your time. This PR is trying to reintroduce it with fixes to the issues you've presented. Can I humbly ask you to test this commit one final time? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/146806 ___ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [PHIElimination] Reuse existing COPY in predecessor basic block (Take Two) (PR #146806)
https://github.com/guy-david edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/146806 ___ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
