[PATCH] D115844: [ubsan] Using metadata instead of prologue data for function sanitizer

[Yuanfang Chen via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

ychen added a comment.

In D115844#3321190 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D115844#3321190>, @pcc wrote:

> On the bug you have:
>
>   define internal fastcc void 
> @&#8203;_Z4callIiE4taskv.resume(%_Z4callIiE4taskv.Frame* noalias nonnull 
> align 8 dereferenceable(24
>       ) %FramePtr) #&#8203;1 prologue <{ i32, i32 }> <{ i32 846595819, i32 
> trunc (i64 sub (i64 ptrtoint (i8** @&#8203;1 to i64), i64 ptrtoint (void ()* 
> @&#8203;_Z4callIiE4taskv to i64)) to i32) }> {...}
>
> Is it possible for the C/C++ code to take the address of the function 
> `_Z4callIiE4taskv.resume` and call it indirectly?

`*.resume` is a compiler inserted function that is opaque to the programmer. It 
is called indirectly most of the time if not all the time.

> If not, it seems like the right fix would be to arrange for the prologue data 
> to be dropped on the `.resume` function instead of duplicating it there. I 
> would also imagine that whatever signature you have on the `.resume` function 
> would be incorrect since it appears that the coro splitting pass will use a 
> different function signature for that function.

That is addressed by D116130 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D116130>. @rjmccall 
suggested the direction of this patch (which I agreed) 
https://reviews.llvm.org/D114728#3159303.

> Note that D119296 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D119296> will have the same 
> problem.

Thanks for the info!


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D115844/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D115844

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits