On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 12/02/2016 01:29 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> On 11/23/2016 03:13 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 02:57:07PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
> I started review pro
On 12/02/2016 01:29 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> On 11/23/2016 03:13 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 02:57:07PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
I started review process in libsanitizer: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26965
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 11/23/2016 03:13 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 02:57:07PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> I started review process in libsanitizer: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26965
>>> And I have a question that was asked in the review:
On 11/23/2016 03:13 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 02:57:07PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
>> I started review process in libsanitizer: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26965
>> And I have a question that was asked in the review: can we distinguish
>> between load and store
>> in case o
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 02:57:07PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
> I started review process in libsanitizer: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26965
> And I have a question that was asked in the review: can we distinguish
> between load and store
> in case of having usage of ASAN_POISON?
I think with ASAN_P
I started review process in libsanitizer: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26965
And I have a question that was asked in the review: can we distinguish between
load and store
in case of having usage of ASAN_POISON?
Load looks as follows:
int
main (int argc, char **argv)
{
char *ptr;
if (argc != 12
On 11/16/2016 05:28 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 05:01:31PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
>> + use_operand_p use_p;
>> + imm_use_iterator imm_iter;
>> + FOR_EACH_IMM_USE_FAST (use_p, imm_iter, poisoned_var)
>> +{
>> + gimple *use = USE_STMT (use_p);
>> + if (is_g
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 05:01:31PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
> + use_operand_p use_p;
> + imm_use_iterator imm_iter;
> + FOR_EACH_IMM_USE_FAST (use_p, imm_iter, poisoned_var)
> +{
> + gimple *use = USE_STMT (use_p);
> + if (is_gimple_debug (use))
> + continue;
> +
> + bui
As the patch quite significantly slowed down tramp3d, there's analysis
of # of variables which are poisoned by the sanitizer:
== normal variables ==
24 B: 348x (5.80%)
16 B: 273x (4.55%)
8 B: 237x (3.95%)
1 B: 177x (2.95%)
4 B: 119x (1.98%)
40 B: 89x (1.48%)
144 B:
On 11/16/2016 02:07 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 01:25:04PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
>>
>> +
>> +/* Expand the ASAN_{LOAD,STORE} builtins. */
>
> Stale comment.
Fixed.
>
>> +
>> +bool
>> +asan_expand_poison_ifn (gimple_stmt_iterator *iter,
>> +bool
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 01:25:04PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
>
> +
> +/* Expand the ASAN_{LOAD,STORE} builtins. */
Stale comment.
> +
> +bool
> +asan_expand_poison_ifn (gimple_stmt_iterator *iter,
> + bool *need_commit_edge_insert)
> +{
...
> + use_operand_p use_p;
> + i
On 11/16/2016 01:25 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> Hello
>
> Following patch is a candidate that re-writes VAR_DECLs that are
> is_gimple_reg_type with:
> my_char_25 = ASAN_POISON ();
>
> that is eventually transformed to:
> __builtin___asan_report_use_after_scope_noabort ("my_char", 1);
>
> at place
Hello
Following patch is a candidate that re-writes VAR_DECLs that are
is_gimple_reg_type with:
my_char_25 = ASAN_POISON ();
that is eventually transformed to:
__builtin___asan_report_use_after_scope_noabort ("my_char", 1);
at places where my_char_25 is used. That introduces a new entry point
to
13 matches
Mail list logo
