martinuy wrote: > A side thought: what is the expected effect of this warning (namely, treating > implicit signing the same way as `__ptrauth` qualifiers) when building an > existing code base for a new target that has function pointer signing > enabled? My initial assumption is that in a ptrauth-unaware C code most > function pointer uses would be diagnosed. I'm not sure what the effect > **should** be, but I guess if my assumption is correct this could be quite > unintended. >
It's a fair point, thanks for bringing it up. My thinking is that building a pointer authentication unaware code base for a new target that supports the feature shouldn't be enough reason for this warning to pop up. I would expect this warning only if a compilation argument that turns pointer authentication on is explicitly passed, such as `-fptrauth-calls`. If pointer authentication is intended to be on and the argument is, thus, passed, the warning would be a good opportunity to make a conscious decision: turn pointer authentication off, harden the code base, turn the warning off, etc. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157779 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
