2014-05-14 19:09 GMT+04:00 H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com>: > On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich....@gmail.com> wrote: >> 2014-05-13 23:21 GMT+04:00 Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com>: >>> On 05/13/14 02:38, Ilya Enkovich wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> propagate constant bounds value and remove checks in called function). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So from a linking standpoint, presumably you have to mangle the >>>>> instrumented >>>>> caller/callee in some manner. Right? Or are you dynamically dispatching >>>>> somehow? >>>> >>>> >>>> Originally the idea was o have instrumented clone to have the same >>>> assembler name as the original function. Since instrumented code is >>>> fully compatible with not instrumented code, we always emit only one >>>> version. Usage of the same assembler name allows instrumented and not >>>> instrumented calls to look similar in assembler. It worked fine until >>>> I tried it with LTO where assembler name is used as a unique >>>> identifier. With linker resolutions files it became even more harder >>>> to use such approach. To resolve these issues I started to use new >>>> assembler name with postfix, but linked with the original name using >>>> IDENTIFIER_TRANSPARENT_ALIAS. It gives different assembler names for >>>> clones and originals during compilation, but both clone and original >>>> functions have similar name in output assembler. >>> >>> OK. So if I read that correctly, it implies that the existence of bounds >>> information does not change the signature of the callee. This is obviously >>> important for C++. >>> >>> Sounds like I need to sit down with the branch and see how this works in the >>> new scheme. >> >> Both mpx branch and Wiki >> (http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Intel%20MPX%20support%20in%20the%20GCC%20compiler) >> page are up-to-date now and may be tried out either in NOP mode or >> with simulator. Let me know if you have any troubles with using it. >> > > I built it. But "-fcheck-pointer-bounds -mmpx" doesn't generate > MPX enabled executable which runs on both MPX-enabled and > non MPX-enabled hardwares. I didn't see any MPX run-time library.
MPX run-time library is not a part of GCC now. It goes with Intel SDE. See https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/using-intel-mpx-with-the-intel-software-development-emulator for usage instructions. Ilya > > -- > H.J.
