[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-03-16 Thread Nikita Popov via cfe-commits 

nikic wrote:

> > Shouldn't plain `-fsanitize=undefined` disable this sanitizer by default 
> > (requiring explicit opt-in)? In `-fwrapv` mode this is not undefined 
> > behavior, so `-fsanitize=undefined` should not complain about it.
> 
> I was on the fence whether `-fsanitize=undefined` should expand to 
> signed-integer-overflow: [#80089 
> (comment)](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80089#issuecomment-1945202620)
> 
> Perhaps you have run into some convenience issues? #85501 for the 
> signed-integer-overflow suppresion.

I don't use `-fwrapv` myself, so this is more a philosophical consideration. It 
seems wrong to me for `-fsanitize=undefined` to report something as undefined 
behavior which is not undefined behavior in the used language dialect. 
`-fsanitize=undefined` already has a lot of checks that are conditioned on the 
used language dialect, so excluding the signed overflow case in particular from 
that general approach it is a bit odd.

Thanks for putting up the patch!

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-03-15 Thread Fangrui Song via cfe-commits 

MaskRay wrote:

> Shouldn't plain `-fsanitize=undefined` disable this sanitizer by default 
> (requiring explicit opt-in)? In `-fwrapv` mode this is not undefined 
> behavior, so `-fsanitize=undefined` should not complain about it.

I was on the fence whether `-fsanitize=undefined` should expand to 
signed-integer-overflow: 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80089#issuecomment-1945202620

Perhaps you have run into some convenience issues? #85501 for the 
signed-integer-overflow suppresion.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-03-08 Thread Nikita Popov via cfe-commits 

nikic wrote:

Shouldn't plain `-fsanitize=undefined` disable this sanitizer by default 
(requiring explicit opt-in)? In `-fwrapv` mode this is not undefined behavior, 
so `-fsanitize=undefined`  should not complain about it.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-21 Thread via cfe-commits 

github-actions[bot] wrote:



@JustinStitt Congratulations on having your first Pull Request (PR) merged into 
the LLVM Project!

Your changes will be combined with recent changes from other authors, then 
tested
by our [build bots](https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/). If there is a problem with 
a build, you may recieve a report in an email or a comment on this PR.

Please check whether problems have been caused by your change specifically, as
the builds can include changes from many authors. It is not uncommon for your
change to be included in a build that fails due to someone else's changes, or
infrastructure issues.

How to do this, and the rest of the post-merge process, is covered in detail 
[here](https://llvm.org/docs/MyFirstTypoFix.html#myfirsttypofix-issues-after-landing-your-pr).

If your change does cause a problem, it may be reverted, or you can revert it 
yourself.
This is a normal part of [LLVM 
development](https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#patch-reversion-policy).
 You can fix your changes and open a new PR to merge them again.

If you don't get any reports, no action is required from you. Your changes are 
working as expected, well done!


https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-21 Thread Bill Wendling via cfe-commits 

https://github.com/bwendling closed 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-21 Thread Bill Wendling via cfe-commits 

https://github.com/bwendling approved this pull request.


https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Kees Cook via cfe-commits 

https://github.com/kees approved this pull request.

Working as expected for me!

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Kees Cook via cfe-commits 

kees wrote:

This doesn't seem to do anything for me with the Linux kernel's -next branch 
(which supports -sio as `CONFIG_UBSAN_SIGNED_WRAP=y`). e.g. I see no behavioral 
difference with test_ubsan.ko nor the expected atomic overflows.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Fangrui Song via cfe-commits 

https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.


https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Justin Stitt via cfe-commits 

https://github.com/JustinStitt edited 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Justin Stitt via cfe-commits 


@@ -70,6 +77,7 @@ void test1(void) {
   // WRAPV: add i8 {{.*}}, 1

JustinStitt wrote:

How's 
[1d9cb0a](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432/commits/1d9cb0aca8985aa1636780b3ff9a863962cc2d57)
 look?

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Justin Stitt via cfe-commits 

https://github.com/JustinStitt updated 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432

>From b02b09b9eb4f9a8ac60dd077d95c67b959db3b70 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Justin Stitt 
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 22:21:02 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] support fwrapv with signed int overflow sanitizer

---
 clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst   |  3 +++
 clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst |  9 +
 clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp| 16 
 clang/test/CodeGen/integer-overflow.c | 12 
 4 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst b/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
index 5bca2c965c866b..685b19cabeb82c 100644
--- a/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
+++ b/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
@@ -399,6 +399,9 @@ Moved checkers
 Sanitizers
 --
 
+- ``-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow`` now instruments signed arithmetic even
+  when ``-fwrapv`` is enabled. Previously, only division checks were enabled.
+
 Python Binding Changes
 --
 
diff --git a/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst 
b/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst
index b8ad3804f18903..8f58c92bd2a163 100644
--- a/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst
+++ b/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst
@@ -190,10 +190,11 @@ Available checks are:
   -  ``-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow``: Signed integer overflow, where the
  result of a signed integer computation cannot be represented in its type.
  This includes all the checks covered by ``-ftrapv``, as well as checks for
- signed division overflow (``INT_MIN/-1``), but not checks for
- lossy implicit conversions performed before the computation
- (see ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion``). Both of these two issues are
- handled by ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion`` group of checks.
+ signed division overflow (``INT_MIN/-1``). Note that checks are still
+ added even when ``-fwrapv`` is enabled. This sanitizer does not check for
+ lossy implicit conversions performed before the computation (see
+ ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion``). Both of these two issues are handled
+ by ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion`` group of checks.
   -  ``-fsanitize=unreachable``: If control flow reaches an unreachable
  program point.
   -  ``-fsanitize=unsigned-integer-overflow``: Unsigned integer overflow, where
diff --git a/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp 
b/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
index 576734e460b9c1..7621d9bcdec991 100644
--- a/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
@@ -723,7 +723,9 @@ class ScalarExprEmitter
 if (Ops.Ty->isSignedIntegerOrEnumerationType()) {
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-return Builder.CreateMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
+if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
+  return Builder.CreateMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
+[[fallthrough]];
   case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
 if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
   return Builder.CreateNSWMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
@@ -2568,7 +2570,9 @@ llvm::Value 
*ScalarExprEmitter::EmitIncDecConsiderOverflowBehavior(
   StringRef Name = IsInc ? "inc" : "dec";
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-return Builder.CreateAdd(InVal, Amount, Name);
+if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
+return Builder.CreateAdd(InVal, Amount, Name);
+[[fallthrough]];
   case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
 if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
   return Builder.CreateNSWAdd(InVal, Amount, Name);
@@ -3913,7 +3917,9 @@ Value *ScalarExprEmitter::EmitAdd(const BinOpInfo &op) {
   if (op.Ty->isSignedIntegerOrEnumerationType()) {
 switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
 case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-  return Builder.CreateAdd(op.LHS, op.RHS, "add");
+  if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
+return Builder.CreateAdd(op.LHS, op.RHS, "add");
+  [[fallthrough]];
 case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
   if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
 return Builder.CreateNSWAdd(op.LHS, op.RHS, "add");
@@ -4067,7 +4073,9 @@ Value *ScalarExprEmitter::EmitSub(const BinOpInfo &op) {
 if (op.Ty->isSignedIntegerOrEnumerationType()) {
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-return Builder.CreateSub(op.LHS, op.RHS, "sub");
+if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
+  return Builder.CreateSub(op.LHS, op.RHS, "sub");
+[[fallthrough]];
   case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
 if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
   return Builder.CreateNSWSub(op.LHS, op.RHS, "sub");
d

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Fangrui Song via cfe-commits 


@@ -70,6 +77,7 @@ void test1(void) {
   // WRAPV: add i8 {{.*}}, 1

MaskRay wrote:

L72 needs a `// CATCH_WRAP: getelementptr i32, ptr`

Actually, since -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow and -fwrapv 
-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow share so many checks. Perhaps share the 
check prefixes?

```
--check-prefixes=CATCH_UB,CATCH_UB_POINTER
--check-prefixes=CATCH_UB,NOCATCH_UB_POINTER
```

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Justin Stitt via cfe-commits 


@@ -399,6 +399,9 @@ Moved checkers
 Sanitizers
 --
 
+- ``-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow`` now instruments signed arithmetic even
+  when ``-fwrapv`` is enabled. Previously, only division checks were enabled.

JustinStitt wrote:

Gotcha, resolved with 
[0182698](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432/commits/018269881647673b530b8cb4611c7a380a5a1b5c).
 Let me know if this is detailed enough 😄 

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Justin Stitt via cfe-commits 

https://github.com/JustinStitt updated 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432

>From b02b09b9eb4f9a8ac60dd077d95c67b959db3b70 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Justin Stitt 
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 22:21:02 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] support fwrapv with signed int overflow sanitizer

---
 clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst   |  3 +++
 clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst |  9 +
 clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp| 16 
 clang/test/CodeGen/integer-overflow.c | 12 
 4 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst b/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
index 5bca2c965c866b..685b19cabeb82c 100644
--- a/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
+++ b/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
@@ -399,6 +399,9 @@ Moved checkers
 Sanitizers
 --
 
+- ``-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow`` now instruments signed arithmetic even
+  when ``-fwrapv`` is enabled. Previously, only division checks were enabled.
+
 Python Binding Changes
 --
 
diff --git a/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst 
b/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst
index b8ad3804f18903..8f58c92bd2a163 100644
--- a/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst
+++ b/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst
@@ -190,10 +190,11 @@ Available checks are:
   -  ``-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow``: Signed integer overflow, where the
  result of a signed integer computation cannot be represented in its type.
  This includes all the checks covered by ``-ftrapv``, as well as checks for
- signed division overflow (``INT_MIN/-1``), but not checks for
- lossy implicit conversions performed before the computation
- (see ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion``). Both of these two issues are
- handled by ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion`` group of checks.
+ signed division overflow (``INT_MIN/-1``). Note that checks are still
+ added even when ``-fwrapv`` is enabled. This sanitizer does not check for
+ lossy implicit conversions performed before the computation (see
+ ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion``). Both of these two issues are handled
+ by ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion`` group of checks.
   -  ``-fsanitize=unreachable``: If control flow reaches an unreachable
  program point.
   -  ``-fsanitize=unsigned-integer-overflow``: Unsigned integer overflow, where
diff --git a/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp 
b/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
index 576734e460b9c1..7621d9bcdec991 100644
--- a/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
@@ -723,7 +723,9 @@ class ScalarExprEmitter
 if (Ops.Ty->isSignedIntegerOrEnumerationType()) {
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-return Builder.CreateMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
+if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
+  return Builder.CreateMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
+[[fallthrough]];
   case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
 if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
   return Builder.CreateNSWMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
@@ -2568,7 +2570,9 @@ llvm::Value 
*ScalarExprEmitter::EmitIncDecConsiderOverflowBehavior(
   StringRef Name = IsInc ? "inc" : "dec";
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-return Builder.CreateAdd(InVal, Amount, Name);
+if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
+return Builder.CreateAdd(InVal, Amount, Name);
+[[fallthrough]];
   case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
 if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
   return Builder.CreateNSWAdd(InVal, Amount, Name);
@@ -3913,7 +3917,9 @@ Value *ScalarExprEmitter::EmitAdd(const BinOpInfo &op) {
   if (op.Ty->isSignedIntegerOrEnumerationType()) {
 switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
 case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-  return Builder.CreateAdd(op.LHS, op.RHS, "add");
+  if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
+return Builder.CreateAdd(op.LHS, op.RHS, "add");
+  [[fallthrough]];
 case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
   if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
 return Builder.CreateNSWAdd(op.LHS, op.RHS, "add");
@@ -4067,7 +4073,9 @@ Value *ScalarExprEmitter::EmitSub(const BinOpInfo &op) {
 if (op.Ty->isSignedIntegerOrEnumerationType()) {
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-return Builder.CreateSub(op.LHS, op.RHS, "sub");
+if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
+  return Builder.CreateSub(op.LHS, op.RHS, "sub");
+[[fallthrough]];
   case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
 if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
   return Builder.CreateNSWSub(op.LHS, op.RHS, "sub");
d

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Vitaly Buka via cfe-commits 

vitalybuka wrote:

LGTM

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Vitaly Buka via cfe-commits 


@@ -399,6 +399,9 @@ Moved checkers
 Sanitizers
 --
 
+- ``-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow`` now instruments signed arithmetic even
+  when ``-fwrapv`` is enabled. Previously, only division checks were enabled.

vitalybuka wrote:

It should work, it's about release note
As a hint if users who had `-fsanitize=undefined -fwrapv` and not they suddenly 
see reports.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Vitaly Buka via cfe-commits 


@@ -723,7 +723,9 @@ class ScalarExprEmitter
 if (Ops.Ty->isSignedIntegerOrEnumerationType()) {
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-return Builder.CreateMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
+if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))

vitalybuka wrote:

not the same

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Justin Stitt via cfe-commits 


@@ -399,6 +399,9 @@ Moved checkers
 Sanitizers
 --
 
+- ``-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow`` now instruments signed arithmetic even
+  when ``-fwrapv`` is enabled. Previously, only division checks were enabled.

JustinStitt wrote:

Doesn't `-fno-sanitizer-signed-integer-overflow` already work? I did some 
[testing in godbolt](https://godbolt.org/z/oWdxvzs4P) and I am able to toggle 
this sanitizer on/off.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Justin Stitt via cfe-commits 


@@ -723,7 +723,9 @@ class ScalarExprEmitter
 if (Ops.Ty->isSignedIntegerOrEnumerationType()) {
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-return Builder.CreateMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
+if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))

JustinStitt wrote:

One creates `CreateMul` and other `CreateNSWMul`. I believe this is useful for 
optimizations later

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Vitaly Buka via cfe-commits 


@@ -723,7 +723,9 @@ class ScalarExprEmitter
 if (Ops.Ty->isSignedIntegerOrEnumerationType()) {
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-return Builder.CreateMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
+if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))

vitalybuka wrote:

Is'nt the same as:

  case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
  case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
  return Builder.CreateNSWMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
[[fallthrough]];
  case LangOptions::SOB_Trapping:
```

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Fangrui Song via cfe-commits 

MaskRay wrote:

@efriedma-quic @rjmccall 

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Fangrui Song via cfe-commits 

MaskRay wrote:

Thanks! This does look simpler than `-fsanitize=signed-integer-wrap`

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Justin Stitt via cfe-commits 

JustinStitt wrote:

> ⚠️ C/C++ code formatter, clang-format found issues in your code. ⚠️
> 
> You can test this locally with the following command:
> View the diff from clang-format here.

Fixed in 
[e5e92e6](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432/commits/e5e92e6c07a9fbbac698a3b6bb4422f26ea06583)

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Vitaly Buka via cfe-commits 


@@ -399,6 +399,9 @@ Moved checkers
 Sanitizers
 --
 
+- ``-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow`` now instruments signed arithmetic even
+  when ``-fwrapv`` is enabled. Previously, only division checks were enabled.

vitalybuka wrote:

Maybe suggest to add `-fno-sanitize=signed-integer-overflow` with `-fwrapv` if 
we users does not care about errors.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread via cfe-commits 

github-actions[bot] wrote:




:warning: C/C++ code formatter, clang-format found issues in your code. 
:warning:



You can test this locally with the following command:


``bash
git-clang-format --diff 1219214a3bcc51022492928b8bb4ff4bdb75d0cb 
b02b09b9eb4f9a8ac60dd077d95c67b959db3b70 -- clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp 
clang/test/CodeGen/integer-overflow.c
``





View the diff from clang-format here.


``diff
diff --git a/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp 
b/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
index 7621d9bcde..10b7457522 100644
--- a/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
@@ -724,7 +724,7 @@ public:
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
 if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
-  return Builder.CreateMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
+  return Builder.CreateMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
 [[fallthrough]];
   case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
 if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
@@ -2571,7 +2571,7 @@ llvm::Value 
*ScalarExprEmitter::EmitIncDecConsiderOverflowBehavior(
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
 if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
-return Builder.CreateAdd(InVal, Amount, Name);
+  return Builder.CreateAdd(InVal, Amount, Name);
 [[fallthrough]];
   case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
 if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))

``




https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Justin Stitt via cfe-commits 

https://github.com/JustinStitt edited 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Justin Stitt via cfe-commits 

https://github.com/JustinStitt updated 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432

>From b02b09b9eb4f9a8ac60dd077d95c67b959db3b70 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Justin Stitt 
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 22:21:02 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] support fwrapv with signed int overflow sanitizer

---
 clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst   |  3 +++
 clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst |  9 +
 clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp| 16 
 clang/test/CodeGen/integer-overflow.c | 12 
 4 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst b/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
index 5bca2c965c866b..685b19cabeb82c 100644
--- a/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
+++ b/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
@@ -399,6 +399,9 @@ Moved checkers
 Sanitizers
 --
 
+- ``-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow`` now instruments signed arithmetic even
+  when ``-fwrapv`` is enabled. Previously, only division checks were enabled.
+
 Python Binding Changes
 --
 
diff --git a/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst 
b/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst
index b8ad3804f18903..8f58c92bd2a163 100644
--- a/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst
+++ b/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst
@@ -190,10 +190,11 @@ Available checks are:
   -  ``-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow``: Signed integer overflow, where the
  result of a signed integer computation cannot be represented in its type.
  This includes all the checks covered by ``-ftrapv``, as well as checks for
- signed division overflow (``INT_MIN/-1``), but not checks for
- lossy implicit conversions performed before the computation
- (see ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion``). Both of these two issues are
- handled by ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion`` group of checks.
+ signed division overflow (``INT_MIN/-1``). Note that checks are still
+ added even when ``-fwrapv`` is enabled. This sanitizer does not check for
+ lossy implicit conversions performed before the computation (see
+ ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion``). Both of these two issues are handled
+ by ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion`` group of checks.
   -  ``-fsanitize=unreachable``: If control flow reaches an unreachable
  program point.
   -  ``-fsanitize=unsigned-integer-overflow``: Unsigned integer overflow, where
diff --git a/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp 
b/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
index 576734e460b9c1..7621d9bcdec991 100644
--- a/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
@@ -723,7 +723,9 @@ class ScalarExprEmitter
 if (Ops.Ty->isSignedIntegerOrEnumerationType()) {
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-return Builder.CreateMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
+if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
+  return Builder.CreateMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
+[[fallthrough]];
   case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
 if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
   return Builder.CreateNSWMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
@@ -2568,7 +2570,9 @@ llvm::Value 
*ScalarExprEmitter::EmitIncDecConsiderOverflowBehavior(
   StringRef Name = IsInc ? "inc" : "dec";
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-return Builder.CreateAdd(InVal, Amount, Name);
+if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
+return Builder.CreateAdd(InVal, Amount, Name);
+[[fallthrough]];
   case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
 if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
   return Builder.CreateNSWAdd(InVal, Amount, Name);
@@ -3913,7 +3917,9 @@ Value *ScalarExprEmitter::EmitAdd(const BinOpInfo &op) {
   if (op.Ty->isSignedIntegerOrEnumerationType()) {
 switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
 case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-  return Builder.CreateAdd(op.LHS, op.RHS, "add");
+  if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
+return Builder.CreateAdd(op.LHS, op.RHS, "add");
+  [[fallthrough]];
 case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
   if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
 return Builder.CreateNSWAdd(op.LHS, op.RHS, "add");
@@ -4067,7 +4073,9 @@ Value *ScalarExprEmitter::EmitSub(const BinOpInfo &op) {
 if (op.Ty->isSignedIntegerOrEnumerationType()) {
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-return Builder.CreateSub(op.LHS, op.RHS, "sub");
+if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
+  return Builder.CreateSub(op.LHS, op.RHS, "sub");
+[[fallthrough]];
   case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
 if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
   return Builder.CreateNSWSub(op.LHS, op.RHS, "sub");
d

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread via cfe-commits 

llvmbot wrote:




@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-codegen

Author: Justin Stitt (JustinStitt)


Changes

**Reasoning**
Clang has a `signed-integer-overflow` sanitizer to catch arithmetic overflow; 
however, most of its instrumentation [fails to 
apply](https://godbolt.org/z/ee41rE8o6) when `-fwrapv` is enabled; this is by 
design.

The Linux kernel enables `-fno-strict-overflow` which implies `-fwrapv`. This 
means we are [currently unable to detect signed-integer 
wrap-around](https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/26). All the while, the root 
cause of many security vulnerabilities in the Linux kernel is [arithmetic 
overflow](https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/190.html). 

To work around this and enhance the functionality of 
`-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow`, let's instrument signed arithmetic even 
if the signed overflow behavior is defined.

Initially, I created a [new sanitizer @ 
(pr/80089)](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80089) but simply 
changing the SIO sanitizer itself may be the better approach as per @MaskRay 's review from that PR.

cc: @nickdesaulniers @kees @nathanchance @bwendling @MaskRay 


---
Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432.diff


4 Files Affected:

- (modified) clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst (+3) 
- (modified) clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst (+5-4) 
- (modified) clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp (+12-4) 
- (modified) clang/test/CodeGen/integer-overflow.c (+12) 


``diff
diff --git a/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst b/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
index 5bca2c965c866b..685b19cabeb82c 100644
--- a/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
+++ b/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
@@ -399,6 +399,9 @@ Moved checkers
 Sanitizers
 --
 
+- ``-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow`` now instruments signed arithmetic even
+  when ``-fwrapv`` is enabled. Previously, only division checks were enabled.
+
 Python Binding Changes
 --
 
diff --git a/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst 
b/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst
index b8ad3804f18903..8f58c92bd2a163 100644
--- a/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst
+++ b/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst
@@ -190,10 +190,11 @@ Available checks are:
   -  ``-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow``: Signed integer overflow, where the
  result of a signed integer computation cannot be represented in its type.
  This includes all the checks covered by ``-ftrapv``, as well as checks for
- signed division overflow (``INT_MIN/-1``), but not checks for
- lossy implicit conversions performed before the computation
- (see ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion``). Both of these two issues are
- handled by ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion`` group of checks.
+ signed division overflow (``INT_MIN/-1``). Note that checks are still
+ added even when ``-fwrapv`` is enabled. This sanitizer does not check for
+ lossy implicit conversions performed before the computation (see
+ ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion``). Both of these two issues are handled
+ by ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion`` group of checks.
   -  ``-fsanitize=unreachable``: If control flow reaches an unreachable
  program point.
   -  ``-fsanitize=unsigned-integer-overflow``: Unsigned integer overflow, where
diff --git a/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp 
b/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
index 576734e460b9c1..7621d9bcdec991 100644
--- a/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
@@ -723,7 +723,9 @@ class ScalarExprEmitter
 if (Ops.Ty->isSignedIntegerOrEnumerationType()) {
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-return Builder.CreateMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
+if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
+  return Builder.CreateMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
+[[fallthrough]];
   case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
 if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
   return Builder.CreateNSWMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
@@ -2568,7 +2570,9 @@ llvm::Value 
*ScalarExprEmitter::EmitIncDecConsiderOverflowBehavior(
   StringRef Name = IsInc ? "inc" : "dec";
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-return Builder.CreateAdd(InVal, Amount, Name);
+if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
+return Builder.CreateAdd(InVal, Amount, Name);
+[[fallthrough]];
   case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
 if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
   return Builder.CreateNSWAdd(InVal, Amount, Name);
@@ -3913,7 +3917,9 @@ Value *ScalarExprEmitter::EmitAdd(const BinOpInfo &op) {
   if (op.Ty->isSignedIntegerOrEnumerationType()) {
 switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
 case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-  return Builder.CreateAdd(op.LHS, op.RHS, "add");
+  if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::Sign

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread via cfe-commits 

github-actions[bot] wrote:



Thank you for submitting a Pull Request (PR) to the LLVM Project!

This PR will be automatically labeled and the relevant teams will be
notified.

If you wish to, you can add reviewers by using the "Reviewers" section on this 
page.

If this is not working for you, it is probably because you do not have write
permissions for the repository. In which case you can instead tag reviewers by
name in a comment by using `@` followed by their GitHub username.

If you have received no comments on your PR for a week, you can request a review
by "ping"ing the PR by adding a comment “Ping”. The common courtesy "ping" rate
is once a week. Please remember that you are asking for valuable time from 
other developers.

If you have further questions, they may be answered by the [LLVM GitHub User 
Guide](https://llvm.org/docs/GitHub.html).

You can also ask questions in a comment on this PR, on the [LLVM 
Discord](https://discord.com/invite/xS7Z362) or on the 
[forums](https://discourse.llvm.org/).

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] Sanitizer: Support -fwrapv with -fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (PR #82432)

2024-02-20 Thread Justin Stitt via cfe-commits 

https://github.com/JustinStitt created 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82432

**Reasoning**
Clang has a `signed-integer-overflow` sanitizer to catch arithmetic overflow; 
however, most of its instrumentation [fails to 
apply](https://godbolt.org/z/ee41rE8o6) when `-fwrapv` is enabled; this is by 
design.

The Linux kernel enables `-fno-strict-overflow` which implies `-fwrapv`. This 
means we are [currently unable to detect signed-integer 
wrap-around](https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/26). All the while, the root 
cause of many security vulnerabilities in the Linux kernel is [arithmetic 
overflow](https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/190.html). 

To work around this and enhance the functionality of 
`-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow`, let's instrument signed arithmetic even 
if the signed overflow behavior is defined.

Initially, I created a [new sanitizer @ 
(pr/80089)](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80089) but simply 
changing the SIO sanitizer itself may be the better approach as per @MaskRay 's 
review from that PR.

cc: @nickdesaulniers @kees @nathanchance @bwendling @MaskRay 


>From b02b09b9eb4f9a8ac60dd077d95c67b959db3b70 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Justin Stitt 
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 22:21:02 +
Subject: [PATCH] support fwrapv with signed int overflow sanitizer

---
 clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst   |  3 +++
 clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst |  9 +
 clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp| 16 
 clang/test/CodeGen/integer-overflow.c | 12 
 4 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst b/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
index 5bca2c965c866b..685b19cabeb82c 100644
--- a/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
+++ b/clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
@@ -399,6 +399,9 @@ Moved checkers
 Sanitizers
 --
 
+- ``-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow`` now instruments signed arithmetic even
+  when ``-fwrapv`` is enabled. Previously, only division checks were enabled.
+
 Python Binding Changes
 --
 
diff --git a/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst 
b/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst
index b8ad3804f18903..8f58c92bd2a163 100644
--- a/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst
+++ b/clang/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst
@@ -190,10 +190,11 @@ Available checks are:
   -  ``-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow``: Signed integer overflow, where the
  result of a signed integer computation cannot be represented in its type.
  This includes all the checks covered by ``-ftrapv``, as well as checks for
- signed division overflow (``INT_MIN/-1``), but not checks for
- lossy implicit conversions performed before the computation
- (see ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion``). Both of these two issues are
- handled by ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion`` group of checks.
+ signed division overflow (``INT_MIN/-1``). Note that checks are still
+ added even when ``-fwrapv`` is enabled. This sanitizer does not check for
+ lossy implicit conversions performed before the computation (see
+ ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion``). Both of these two issues are handled
+ by ``-fsanitize=implicit-conversion`` group of checks.
   -  ``-fsanitize=unreachable``: If control flow reaches an unreachable
  program point.
   -  ``-fsanitize=unsigned-integer-overflow``: Unsigned integer overflow, where
diff --git a/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp 
b/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
index 576734e460b9c1..7621d9bcdec991 100644
--- a/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp
@@ -723,7 +723,9 @@ class ScalarExprEmitter
 if (Ops.Ty->isSignedIntegerOrEnumerationType()) {
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-return Builder.CreateMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
+if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
+  return Builder.CreateMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
+[[fallthrough]];
   case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
 if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
   return Builder.CreateNSWMul(Ops.LHS, Ops.RHS, "mul");
@@ -2568,7 +2570,9 @@ llvm::Value 
*ScalarExprEmitter::EmitIncDecConsiderOverflowBehavior(
   StringRef Name = IsInc ? "inc" : "dec";
   switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehavior()) {
   case LangOptions::SOB_Defined:
-return Builder.CreateAdd(InVal, Amount, Name);
+if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
+return Builder.CreateAdd(InVal, Amount, Name);
+[[fallthrough]];
   case LangOptions::SOB_Undefined:
 if (!CGF.SanOpts.has(SanitizerKind::SignedIntegerOverflow))
   return Builder.CreateNSWAdd(InVal, Amount, Name);
@@ -3913,7 +3917,9 @@ Value *ScalarExprEmitter::EmitAdd(const BinOpInfo &op) {
   if (op.Ty->isSignedIntegerOrEnumerationType()) {
 switch (CGF.getLangOpts().getSignedOverflowBehav