From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>
Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/test_stackinit: move a local outside the switch statement
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 13:58:05 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202002191347.B689E5B43A@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAG_fn=X-BeOooHDCKczm+KzWDBp_TY5e2VTnUxiqbHpipoF-sg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 06:56:38PM +0100, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 6:36 PM Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
> Am I understanding right that these warnings only show up in the
> instrumented build?
Correct.
> According to the GCC manual:
>
> -Wswitch-unreachable does not warn if the statement between the
> controlling expression and the first case label is just a declaration
Right, just a declaration is okay. An initializer is not handled:
switch (argc) {
int foo = 0;
case 0:
...
foo.c:6:7: warning: statement will never be executed
[-Wswitch-unreachable]
6 | int foo = 0;
| ^~~
The problem I had with the "simple" stackinit GCC plugin was that it
didn't handle padding. What I don't understand is why structleak (with
seemingly the same initialization) _does_ initialize padding:
structleak:
PASS_INFO(structleak, "early_optimizations", 1, PASS_POS_INSERT_BEFORE);
...
/* build the initializer expression */
type = TREE_TYPE(var);
if (AGGREGATE_TYPE_P(type))
initializer = build_constructor(type, NULL);
else
initializer = fold_convert(type, integer_zero_node);
/* build the initializer stmt */
init_stmt = gimple_build_assign(var, initializer);
gsi = gsi_after_labels(single_succ(ENTRY_BLOCK_PTR_FOR_FN(cfun)));
gsi_insert_before(&gsi, init_stmt, GSI_NEW_STMT);
update_stmt(init_stmt);
vs stackinit:
register_callback(plugin_name, PLUGIN_FINISH_DECL, finish_decl, NULL);
...
type = TREE_TYPE (decl);
if (AGGREGATE_TYPE_P (type))
DECL_INITIAL (decl) = build_constructor (type, NULL);
else
DECL_INITIAL (decl) = fold_convert (type, integer_zero_node);
I assume the difference is due to either pass ordering or the former's
basic block splitting. I haven't had time to dig in and figure it out.
--
Kees Cook
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-19 21:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-18 9:48 [PATCH] lib/test_stackinit: move a local outside the switch statement glider
2020-02-19 17:36 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-19 17:56 ` Alexander Potapenko
2020-02-19 21:58 ` Kees Cook [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=202002191347.B689E5B43A@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox