================
@@ -461,6 +463,139 @@ bool PreISelIntrinsicLowering::expandMemIntrinsicUses(
   return Changed;
 }
 
+static bool expandProtectedFieldPtr(Function &Intr) {
+  Module &M = *Intr.getParent();
+
+  SmallPtrSet<GlobalValue *, 2> DSsToDeactivate;
+
+  Type *Int8Ty = Type::getInt8Ty(M.getContext());
+  Type *Int64Ty = Type::getInt64Ty(M.getContext());
+  PointerType *PtrTy = PointerType::get(M.getContext(), 0);
+
+  Function *SignIntr =
+      Intrinsic::getOrInsertDeclaration(&M, Intrinsic::ptrauth_sign, {});
+  Function *AuthIntr =
+      Intrinsic::getOrInsertDeclaration(&M, Intrinsic::ptrauth_auth, {});
+
+  auto *EmuFnTy = FunctionType::get(Int64Ty, {Int64Ty, Int64Ty}, false);
+  FunctionCallee EmuSignIntr = M.getOrInsertFunction("__emupac_pacda", 
EmuFnTy);
+  FunctionCallee EmuAuthIntr = M.getOrInsertFunction("__emupac_autda", 
EmuFnTy);
+
+  auto CreateSign = [&](IRBuilder<> &B, Value *Val, Value *Disc,
+                        OperandBundleDef DSBundle) {
+    Function *F = B.GetInsertBlock()->getParent();
+    Attribute FSAttr = F->getFnAttribute("target-features");
+    if (FSAttr.isValid() && FSAttr.getValueAsString().contains("+pauth"))
----------------
pcc wrote:

No, the `__emupac_*` functions check for PAC support and use the PAC 
instructions if available, so the encoding will be consistent. The 
target-feature effectively lets us optimize away the else branch of the
```
if (pac) {
  use pac instructions;
} else { 
  use emulated pac;
}
```
in the emupac runtime.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151647
_______________________________________________
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits

Reply via email to