asl wrote:
Thanks @smithp35
I opened https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/99950 to track this
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97237
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listin
https://github.com/kovdan01 closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97237
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/smithp35 approved this pull request.
After discussion in the PAuthABI call. We agreed that it would be best to have
an exemplar of how a signing schema for a platform should be encoded rather
than always using the individual options.
Anton mentioned that we can document that
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+// RUN: %clang --target=aarch64-linux-pauthtest
--sysroot=%S/Inputs/multilib_aarch64_linux_tree -### -c %s 2>&1 | FileCheck %s
DanielKristofKiss wrote:
Looks this is not used:
"clang/test/Driver/Inputs/multilib_aarch64_linux_tree/usr/incl
@@ -1546,16 +1581,28 @@ static void CollectARMPACBTIOptions(const ToolChain
&TC, const ArgList &Args,
CmdArgs.push_back(
Args.MakeArgString(Twine("-msign-return-address=") + Scope));
- if (Scope != "none")
+ if (Scope != "none") {
+if (Triple.getEnvironment() ==
https://github.com/kovdan01 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97237
>From 3b4b1b1739b810d758e68f30c48b648963cff740 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Daniil Kovalev
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 00:50:21 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/8] [PAC][Driver] Implement `-mbranch-protection=pauthabi`
opti
https://github.com/smithp35 commented:
Apologies for the delay in responding, been a bit backed up. I like the idea of
pauthtest as it does give some leeway to change the signing schema.
I expect that with some work this could be made to work with bare-metal targets
too, but I think it is best
@@ -1546,16 +1581,28 @@ static void CollectARMPACBTIOptions(const ToolChain
&TC, const ArgList &Args,
CmdArgs.push_back(
Args.MakeArgString(Twine("-msign-return-address=") + Scope));
- if (Scope != "none")
+ if (Scope != "none") {
+if (Triple.getEnvironment() ==
https://github.com/smithp35 edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97237
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -324,6 +324,9 @@ ARMTargetInfo::ARMTargetInfo(const llvm::Triple &Triple,
case llvm::Triple::GNU:
setABI("apcs-gnu");
break;
+case llvm::Triple::PAuthTest:
kovdan01 wrote:
No, we do not need that, thanks for bringing attention to this.
https://github.com/kovdan01 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97237
>From 3b4b1b1739b810d758e68f30c48b648963cff740 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Daniil Kovalev
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 00:50:21 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/7] [PAC][Driver] Implement `-mbranch-protection=pauthabi`
opti
@@ -324,6 +324,9 @@ ARMTargetInfo::ARMTargetInfo(const llvm::Triple &Triple,
case llvm::Triple::GNU:
setABI("apcs-gnu");
break;
+case llvm::Triple::PAuthTest:
asl wrote:
Do we really need to touch 32-bit ARM?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-p
kovdan01 wrote:
@smithp35 I've implemented `pauthtest` ABI support - see new PR description for
details and tests for examples. I'm not sure if the implementation is nice and
maybe I've put some logic in wrong places while there are better ones, but the
result looks matching the requirements d
https://github.com/kovdan01 reopened
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97237
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kovdan01 closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97237
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kovdan01 edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97237
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
16 matches
Mail list logo
