RE: [PATCH 2/2] x86: Update __CET__ check

> -Original Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of H.J. Lu > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 7:08 PM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; Uros Biz

RE: [PATCH 1/2] x86/CET: Add -fcf-protection to STAGE4_CFLAGS

> -Original Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of H.J. Lu > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 7:08 PM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; Uros Biz

RE: [PATCH 0/5] x86/CET: Remove the -mcet command-lint option

> -Original Message- > From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2018 3:48 PM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; Uros Bizjak > <ubiz...@gmail.com> > Subject: [PATCH 0/5] x86/C

RE: [PATCH] x86/cet: Use unsigned integer to unwind shadow stack

> -Original Message- > From: Lu, Hongjiu > Sent: Monday, April 23, 2018 1:56 PM > To: gccpat...@intel.com > Cc: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; Uros Bizjak > <ubiz...@gmail.com> > Subject: [PATCH] x86/cet: Use unsigned integer to unwi

RE: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

> -Original Message- > From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, April 20, 2018 1:15 PM > To: Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> > Cc: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; Richard Biener > <richard.guent...@gmail.com>;

RE: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

> -Original Message- > From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, April 20, 2018 3:17 AM > To: Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> > Cc: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; Richard Biener > <richard.guent...@gmail.com>;

RE: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

> -Original Message- > From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, April 20, 2018 12:08 AM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Cc: Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com>; Richard Biener > <richard.guent...@gmail.com>;

RE: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

os Bizjak > <ubiz...@gmail.com>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Tsimbalist, Igor V > <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25 PM, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> >

RE: PING: [PATCH] libgcc/CET: Skip signal frames when unwinding shadow stack

> -Original Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of H.J. Lu > Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 3:21 PM > To: GCC Patches > Cc: Uros Bizjak ; Jeff Law > Subject: PING:

RE: [PATCH] i386: Add save_stack_nonlocal and restore_stack_nonlocal

> -Original Message- > From: Lu, Hongjiu > Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2018 12:58 PM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>; Tsimbalist, Igor V > <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Subject: [PATCH] i386: Add save_stack_nonlocal and r

RE: [PATCH] x86/cet: Properly output labels in property note section

> -Original Message- > From: Lu, Hongjiu > Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2018 1:06 PM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>; Tsimbalist, > Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Subject: [PATCH] x86/cet: Properly output labels in prop

RE: PING: [PATCH] libgcc/CET: Add _CET_ENDBR to __stack_split_initialize

> -Original Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of H.J. Lu > Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 3:22 PM > To: GCC Patches > Cc: Uros Bizjak > Subject: PING: [PATCH] libgcc/CET: Add

RE: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

> -Original Message- > From: Uros Bizjak [mailto:ubiz...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2018 3:36 PM > To: H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> > Cc: Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com>; gcc- > patc...@gcc.gnu.org; Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.ts

RE: PING: [PATCH] i386: Insert ENDBR after __morestack call

> -Original Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of H.J. Lu > Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 3:25 PM > To: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Tsimbalist, Igor V > <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.c

RE: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

> <richard.guent...@gmail.com>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Tsimbalist, Igor > V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 02:04:50PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 18

RE: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs

atches@gcc.gnu.org; Tsimbalist, > Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Allow -fcf-protection with multi-byte NOPs > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 4:35 AM, Richard Biener > <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:24 PM,

RE: [PATCH] x86: Compile with -fcf-protection=none -mno-cet

> -Original Message- > From: Lu, Hongjiu > Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2018 12:59 PM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>; Tsimbalist, > Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Subject: [PATCH] x86: Compile with -fcf-protection=none

RE: [PATCH] i386: Insert ENDBR to trampoline for -fcf-protection=branch -mibt

> -Original Message- > From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 5:59 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386: Inser

RE: [PATCH] i386: Insert ENDBR to trampoline for -fcf-protection=branch -mibt

> -Original Message- > From: Lu, Hongjiu > Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2018 12:50 AM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>; Tsimbalist, > Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Subject: [PATCH] i386: Insert ENDBR to trampoline for -

[PATCH] PR 85025: libgcc/config/i386/shadow-stack-unwind.h is wrong

The incspp instruction from CET accepts only the value in the range of 0-255. The patch fixes the typo in the loop to handle this. I'm checking in the fix as obvious. Thanks, Igor PR target/85025 * config/i386/shadow-stack-unwind.h: Fix a typo, tmp => 255. Index:

RE: PR84239, Reimplement CET intrinsics for rdssp/incssp insn

Igor > -Original Message- > From: Joseph Myers [mailto:jos...@codesourcery.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2018 1:24 AM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Cc: Sandra Loosemore <san...@codesourcery.com>; gcc- > patc...@

[PATCH] MPX and CET changes in release notes

MPX is going to be deprecated in gcc-8. Control-flow protection support is in gcc-8. Reflect these in Release Notes for gcc-8. Ok for trunk? Igor Index: changes.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-8/changes.html,v

[PATCH] CET shouldn't be enabled in 32-bit run-time libraries by defualt

ENDBR32 and RDSSPD are multi-byte NOPs on x86-64 processors and newer x86 processors, starting Pentium Pro. They are UD on older 32-bit processors. Detect this at configure time and adjust the default value for enable_cet. GCC will enable CET in 32-bit run-time libraries in any case if

RE: PR84239, Reimplement CET intrinsics for rdssp/incssp insn

> -Original Message- > From: Sandra Loosemore [mailto:san...@codesourcery.com] > Sent: Friday, February 9, 2018 7:42 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; gcc- > patc...@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> > Subj

PR84239, Reimplement CET intrinsics for rdssp/incssp insn

Introduce a couple of new CET intrinsics for reading and updating a shadow stack pointer (_get_ssp and _inc_ssp), which are more user friendly. They replace the existing _rdssp[d|q] and _incssp[d|q] instrinsics. The _get_ssp intrinsic has more deterministic semantic: it returns a value of the

RE: PR 84154: Fix checking -mibt and -mshstk options for control flow protection

> -Original Message- > From: Paolo Carlini [mailto:paolo.carl...@oracle.com] > Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2018 12:46 AM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; gcc- > patc...@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Nick Clifton <ni...@redhat.com>; hjl.to...@

RE: PR 84154: Fix checking -mibt and -mshstk options for control flow protection

> -Original Message- > From: Rainer Orth [mailto:r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de] > Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 11:50 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Nick Clifton <ni...@redhat.com>; > hjl.to..

RE: [PATCH] i386: Mask out the CF_SET bit for -fcf-protection check

> -Original Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of H.J. Lu > Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 10:09 PM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>; Tsimbalist, Igor V > &

RE: [PATCH] Use -fcf-protection=return in cet-intrin-4.c

> -Original Message- > From: Lu, Hongjiu > Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 10:03 PM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>; Tsimbalist, Igor V > <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Subject: [PATCH] Use -fcf-protection=return

RE: [PATCH] Fix ICE with CET and -g (PR target/84146)

> -Original Message- > From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 9:57 PM > To: Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>; Kirill Yukhin > <kirill.yuk...@gmail.com> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Tsimbalist, Igor V > <ig

RE: PR 84154: Fix checking -mibt and -mshstk options for control flow protection

> -Original Message- > From: Nick Clifton [mailto:ni...@redhat.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 1:16 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; hjl.to...@gmail.com > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: PR 84154: Fix checking -

RE: PR 84154: Fix checking -mibt and -mshstk options for control flow protection

> -Original Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Nick Clifton > Sent: Monday, February 5, 2018 4:15 PM > To: hjl.to...@gmail.com > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: RFA: PR 84154: Fix checking -mibt and -mshstk options

RE: [PATCH][PR target/84066] Wrong shadow stack register size is saved for x32

> -Original Message- > From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 3:45 PM > To: Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> > Cc: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; gcc- > patc...@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH][PR

[PATCH][PR target/84066] Wrong shadow stack register size is saved for x32

x32 is a 64-bit process with 32-bit software pointer and kernel may place x32 shadow stack above 4GB. We need to save and restore 64-bit shadow stack register for x32. builtin jmp buf size is 5 pointers. We have space to save 64-bit shadow stack pointer: 32-bit SP, 32-bit FP, 32-bit IP, 64-bit

[PATCH/x86] Move mavx512vnni option from ix86_isa_flags2 to ix86_isa_flags.

This is a follow up patch for pr83488 to fix an error in setting OPTION_MASK_ISA_AVX512VNNI_SET and OPTION_MASK_ISA_AVX512F_SET bits. There were both set in ix86_isa_flags2 while being defined in different ISA sets. Additionally move OPTION_MASK_ISA_AVX512VNNI_SET to ix86_isa_flags as it can be

RE: [i386] PR81842 [CET] -fcf-protection -mcet is incompatible with makecontext family functions

> -Original Message- > From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 6:15 AM > To: Sandra Loosemore <san...@codesourcery.com>; Tsimbalist, Igor V > <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Uros Bizjak <ubiz..

RE: [i386] PR81842 [CET] -fcf-protection -mcet is incompatible with makecontext family functions

> -Original Message- > From: Sandra Loosemore [mailto:san...@codesourcery.com] > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 8:39 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; gcc- > patc...@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> > Subje

[i386] PR81842 [CET] -fcf-protection -mcet is incompatible with makecontext family functions

-fcf-protection -mcet is incompatible with makecontext family functions since they can't properly set up and destroy shadow stack pointer. This change provides a mechanism to help detection shadow stack compatibility. The current proposal is to add -mcheck-shstk-compat option which will predefine

RE: [compare-debug] use call loc for nop_endbr

> -Original Message- > From: Alexandre Oliva [mailto:aol...@redhat.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2017 7:37 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: [compare-debug] use call loc for nop_en

RE: [compare-debug] use call loc for nop_endbr

> -Original Message- > From: Alexandre Oliva [mailto:aol...@redhat.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 8:34 AM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Subject: [compare-debug] use call loc for nop_endbr > >

[i386] PR83109 [CET] improper code generation for builtin_longjmp with -fcf-protection -mcet

According to the description of inssp instruction from Intel CET it adusts the shadow stack pointer (ssp) only by value in the range of [0..255]. As a number of adjustment could be greater than 255 there should be a loop generated to adjust ssp. gcc/ * config/i386/i386.md: Add

RE: [PATCH 08/22] Add Intel CET support for EH in libgcc.

68k.org] > Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2017 2:51 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Cc: Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; i...@airs.com > Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/22] Add Intel CET support for EH in libgcc. > > In file included f

RE: [PATCH 08/22] Add Intel CET support for EH in libgcc.

New patch is attached. The difference is that all newly introduced macro are removed except of _Unwind_Frames_Extra macro. They are replaced with new parameters and local variables. Igor 0008-Add-Intel-CET-support-for-EH-in-libgcc.patch Description:

RE: [PATCH 21/22] Add extra field to gtm_jmpbuf on x86 only

> -Original Message- > From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 9, 2017 2:37 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Cc: Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; > trie...@redhat.com; Jakub Jeline

RE: [PATCH 14/22] Enable building libsanitizer with Intel CET

The revised patch is attached. The differences are in what options are defined and propagated to Makefiles for CET enabling. Ok for trunk? Igor > -Original Message- > From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 1:37 AM > To: Tsimba

RE: [PATCH 21/22] Add extra field to gtm_jmpbuf on x86 only

> -Original Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Law > Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 7:31 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; gcc- > patc...@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: trie..

RE: [PATCH 07/22] Enable building libgcc with CET options.

> -Original Message- > From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 6:21 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; Joseph Myers > <jos...@codesourcery.com>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; i...@airs.com > Subject: Re:

RE: [PATCH 08/22] Add Intel CET support for EH in libgcc.

> -Original Message- > From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 8:06 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; gcc- > patc...@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: i...@airs.com > Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/22] Add Intel CET support f

RE: [PATCH 21/22] Add extra field to gtm_jmpbuf on x86 only

Igor > -Original Message- > From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 7:18 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Cc: Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; > trie...@redhat.com &g

[PATCH 22/22] Enable building libitm with Intel CET

Enable building libitm with Intel CET. The patch is based on previous patch [PATCH 21/22] Add extra field to gtm_jmpbuf on x86 only. Ok for trunk? Igor 0022-Enable-building-libitm-with-Intel-CET.PATCH Description: 0022-Enable-building-libitm-with-Intel-CET.PATCH

[PATCH 21/22] Add extra field to gtm_jmpbuf on x86 only

Intel CET support are seen clearly. Ok for trunk? Igor > -Original Message- > From: Tsimbalist, Igor V > Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 5:30 PM > To: Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: trie...@redhat.com; Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.t

RE: [PATCH 08/22] Add Intel CET support for EH in libgcc.

> -Original Message- > From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 5:49 AM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; gcc- > patc...@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: i...@airs.com > Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/22] Add Intel CET support for

RE: [PATCH 21/22] Enable building libitm with Intel CET

Actually I did changes to add the new field for linux under ifdef __linux__. > -Original Message- > From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 12:21 AM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; gcc- > patc...@g

RE: [PATCH 07/22] Enable building libgcc with CET options.

Ok, just did it :) Igor > -Original Message- > From: Andreas Schwab [mailto:sch...@linux-m68k.org] > Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 4:00 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Cc: Joseph Myers <jos...@codesourcery.com>; gcc-patches

RE: [PATCH 07/22] Enable building libgcc with CET options.

Fixed. - i[34567]86-*-linux* | x86_64-*-linux*) + i[[34567]]86-*-linux* | x86_64-*-linux*) Igor > -Original Message- > From: Andreas Schwab [mailto:sch...@linux-m68k.org] > Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 2:30 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.co

RE: [PATCH 20/22] Enable building libobjc with Intel CET

The revised patch is attached. The differences are in what options are defined and propagated to Makefile for CET enabling.   Ok for trunk? Igor > -Original Message- > From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 1:43 AM > To: Tsimba

RE: [PATCH 19/22] Enable building libgfortran with Intel CET

The revised patch is attached. The differences are in what options are defined and propagated to Makefile for CET enabling.   Ok for trunk? Igor > -Original Message- > From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 1:43 AM > To: Tsimba

RE: [PATCH 18/22] Enable building libmpx with Intel CET

t: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 1:42 AM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; gcc- > patc...@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: enkovich@gmail.com > Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/22] Enable building libmpx with Intel CET > > On 10/12/2017 02:36 PM, Tsimbalist, Igor V wrote: &

RE: [PATCH 17/22] Enable building libquadmath with Intel CET

The revised patch is attached. The differences are in what options are defined and propagated to Makefile for CET enabling.   Ok for trunk? Igor > -Original Message- > From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 1:41 AM > To: Tsimba

RE: [PATCH 16/22] Enable building libssp with Intel CET

The revised patch is attached. The differences are in what options are defined and propagated to Makefile for CET enabling.   Ok for trunk? Igor > -Original Message- > From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 1:38 AM > To: Tsimba

RE: [PATCH 15/22] Enable building libvtv with Intel CET

The revised patch is attached. The differences are in what options are defined and propagated to Makefile for CET enabling.   Ok for trunk? Igor > -Original Message- > From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 1:38 AM > To: Tsimba

RE: [PATCH 13/22] Enable building libstdc++-v3 with Intel CET

The revised patch is attached. The differences are in what options are defined and propagated to Makefile for CET enabling.   Ok for trunk? Igor > -Original Message- > From: Tsimbalist, Igor V > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 2:09 PM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; libstd...

RE: [PATCH 12/22] Enable building libgomp with Intel CET

The revised patch is attached. The differences are in what options are defined and propagated to Makefile for CET enabling.   Ok for trunk? Igor > -Original Message- > From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 1:36 AM > To: Tsimba

RE: [PATCH 11/22] Enable building libatomic with Intel CET

The revised patch is attached. The differences are in what options are defined and propagated to Makefile for CET enabling.   Ok for trunk? Igor > -Original Message- > From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 1:35 AM > To: Tsimba

RE: [PATCH 10/22] Enable building libcilkrts with Intel CET

t: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 1:34 AM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; gcc- > patc...@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/22] Enable building libcilkrts with Intel CET > > On 10/12/2017 02:13 PM, Tsimbalist, Igor V wrote: > > Enab

RE: [PATCH 09/22] Enable building libbacktrace with Intel CET

t: Friday, October 13, 2017 6:45 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/22] Enable building libbacktrace with Intel CET > > "Tsimbalist, Igor V" <igor.v.t

RE: [PATCH 07/22] Enable building libgcc with CET options.

The revised patch is attached. The differences are in what options are defined and propagated to Makefile for CET enabling, also needed asm files are updated. Igor > -Original Message- > From: Tsimbalist, Igor V > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 1:02 AM > To: Josep

RE: [PATCH] i386: Don't generate ENDBR if function is only called directly

OK. Igor > -Original Message- > From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 1:01 AM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Cc: Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: [PAT

RE: [PATCH] i386: Don't generate ENDBR if function is only called directly

hjl.to...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 12:06 AM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Cc: Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386: Don't generate ENDBR if function is only called > directly >

RE: [PATCH] i386: Don't generate ENDBR if function is only called directly

Existing tests cet-label.c cet-switch-2.c cet-sjlj-1.c cet-sjlj-3.c should catch this. Igor > -Original Message- > From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 11:50 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> >

RE: [PATCH] i386: Don't generate ENDBR if function is only called directly

ubiz...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 9:26 PM > To: H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Tsimbalist, Igor V > <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386: Don't generate ENDBR if function is only called > directl

RE: 0006-Part-6.-Add-x86-tests-for-Intel-CET-implementation

I moved the tests to gcc.target/i386 directory and committed the changes. Igor > -Original Message- > From: Andreas Schwab [mailto:sch...@linux-m68k.org] > Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2017 1:41 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Cc: Uros Bizj

RE: 0006-Part-6.-Add-x86-tests-for-Intel-CET-implementation

Those 2 tests were removed during reviewing as they tested __builtin versions. ChangeLog was not updated. Igor > -Original Message- > From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2017 1:59 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.

[PATCH, committed] Add myself to MAINTAINERS

ChangeLog: 2017-10-16 Igor Tsimbalist * MAINTAINERS (write after approval): Add myself. Index: MAINTAINERS === --- MAINTAINERS (revision 253797) +++ MAINTAINERS (working copy) @@ -603,6

RE: [PATCH 09/22] Enable building libbacktrace with Intel CET

> -Original Message- > From: Ian Lance Taylor [mailto:i...@airs.com] > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 1:59 AM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/22

RE: [PATCH 13/22] Enable building libstdc++-v3 with Intel CET

Added libstd...@gcc.gnu.org > -Original Message- > From: Tsimbalist, Igor V > Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 10:24 PM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com>; jwak...@redhat.com; Tsimbalist, Igor V > <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> &

RE: 0006-Part-6.-Add-x86-tests-for-Intel-CET-implementation

> -Original Message- > From: Uros Bizjak [mailto:ubiz...@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 10:02 AM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: 0006-Part-6.-Add-x86-tests-for-Intel-CET-implementa

RE: [PATCH 07/22] Enable building libgcc with CET options.

> -Original Message- > From: Joseph Myers [mailto:jos...@codesourcery.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 10:36 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com>; i...@airs.com > Sub

[PATCH 21/22] Enable building libitm with Intel CET

Enable building libitm with Intel CET options. libitm/ * Makefile.in: Regenerate. * acinclude.m4: Add enable.m4 and cet.m4. * config/x86/sjlj.S (_ITM_beginTransaction): Save Shadow Stack pointer. (GTM_longjmp): Restore Shadow Stack pointer. *

[PATCH 20/22] Enable building libobjc with Intel CET

Enable building libobjc with Intel CET options. libobjc/ * Makefile.in: Regenerate. * aclocal.m4: Likeiwse. * configure: Likewise. * configure.ac: Set CET_FLAGS. Update XCFLAGS. 0020-Enable-building-libobjc-with-Intel-CET.PATCH Description:

[PATCH 19/22] Enable building libgfortran with Intel CET

Enable building libgfortran with Intel CET options. libgfortran/ * acinclude.m4: Add enable.m4, cet.m4. * configure: Regenerate. * configure.ac: Set CET_FLAGS. Update AM_FCFLAGS, AM_CFLAGS, CFLAGS. 0019-Enable-building-libgfortran-with-Intel-CET.PATCH

[PATCH 18/22] Enable building libmpx with Intel CET

Enable building libmpx with Intel CET options. libmpx/ * Makefile.in: Regenerate. * acinclude.m4: Add enable.m4 and cet.m4. * configure: Regenerate. * configure.ac: Set CET_FLAGS. Update XCFLAGS. * mpxrt/Makefile.am: Update libmpx_la_CFLAGS. *

[PATCH 17/22] Enable building libquadmath with Intel CET

Enable building libquadmath with Intel CET options. libquadmath/ * Makefile.am: Update AM_CFLAGS. * Makefile.in: Regenerate: * acinclude.m4: Add enable.m4 and cet.m4. * configure: Regenerate. * configure.ac: Set CET_FLAGS. Update XCFLAGS.

[PATCH 16/22] Enable building libssp with Intel CET

Enable building libssp with Intel CET options. libssp/ * Makefile.am: Update AM_CFLAGS. * Makefile.in: Regenerate. * configure: Likewise. * aclocal.m4: Likewise. * configure.ac: Set CET_FLAGS. Update XCFLAGS.

[PATCH 15/22] Enable building libvtv with Intel CET

Enable building libvtv with Intel CET options. libvtv/ * acinclude.m4: Add enable.m4 and cet.m4. * libvtv/configure: Regenerate. * libvtv/configure.ac: Set CET_FLAGS. Update XCFLAGS. 0015-Enable-building-libvtv-with-Intel-CET.PATCH Description:

[PATCH 14/22] Enable building libsanitizer with Intel CET

Enable building libsanitizer with Intel CET options. libsanitizer/ * acinclude.m4: Add enable.m4 and cet.m4. * Makefile.in: Regenerate. * asan/Makefile.am: Update AM_CXXFLAGS. * asan/Makefile.in: Regenerate. * configure: Likewise. * configure.ac:

[PATCH 13/22] Enable building libstdc++-v3 with Intel CET

Enable building libstdc++v3 with CET options. libstdc++-v3/ * acinclude.m4: Add cet.m4. * configure.ac: Set CET_FLAGS. Update EXTRA_CFLAGS. * libsupc++/Makefile.am: Add EXTRA_CFLAGS. * Makefile.in: Regenerate. * configure: Likewise. *

[PATCH 12/22] Enable building libgomp with Intel CET

Enable building libgomp with CET options. libgomp/ * configure.ac: Set CET_FLAGS, update XCFLAGS and FCFLAGS. * acinclude.m4: Add cet.m4. * configure: Regenerate. * Makefile.in: Likewise. * testsuite/Makefile.in: Likewise

[PATCH 11/22] Enable building libatomic with Intel CET

Enable building libatomic with CET options. libatomic/ * configure.ac: Set CET_FLAGS, update XCFLAGS. * acinclude.m4: Add cet.m4 and enable.m4. * configure: Regenerate. * Makefile.in: Likewise. * testsuite/Makefile.in: Likewise.

[PATCH 10/22] Enable building libcilkrts with Intel CET

Enable building libcilkrts with CET options. libcilkrts/ * Makefile.am: Add AM_CXXFLAGS and XCXXFLAGS. * configure.ac: Set CET_FLAGS, update XCFLAGS, XCXXFLAGS. * Makefile.in: Regenerate. * aclocal.m4: Likewise. * configure: Likewise.

[PATCH 09/22] Enable building libbacktrace with Intel CET

Enable building libbacktrace with CET options. libbacktrace/ * configure.ac: Add CET_FLAGS to EXTRA_FLAGS. * aclocal.m4: Regenerate. * Makefile.in: Likewise. * configure: Likewise. Igor 0009-Enable-building-libbacktrace-with-Intel-CET.PATCH Description:

[PATCH 08/22] Add Intel CET support for EH in libgcc.

Control-flow Enforcement Technology (CET), published by Intel, Introduces the Shadow Stack feature, which ensures a return from a function is done to exactly the same location from where the function was called. When EH is present the control-flow transfer may skip some stack frames and the shadow

[PATCH 07/22] Enable building libgcc with CET options.

Enable building libgcc with CET options by default on Linux/x86 if binutils supports CET v2.0. It can be disabled with --disable-cet. It is an error to configure GCC with --enable-cet if bintuiils doesn't support CET v2.0. config/ * cet.m4: New file gcc/ * config.gcc

RE: 0006-Part-6.-Add-x86-tests-for-Intel-CET-implementation

Attached is an updated patch according to your comments. New tests are added to test ICF optimization in presence of nocf_check attribute. Igor > -Original Message- > From: Tsimbalist, Igor V > Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2017 11:30 PM > To: Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail

RE: 0004-Part-4.-Update-x86-backend-to-enable-Intel-CET

Uros, Attached is an updated patch. The main difference is in option name and attribute name change. Other code is the same. Igor > -Original Message- > From: Tsimbalist, Igor V > Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2017 5:06 PM > To: Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>; gcc-p

RE: 0001-Part-1.-Add-generic-part-for-Intel-CET-enabling

riginal Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Law > Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 8:07 AM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; gcc- > patc...@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: richard.guent...@gmail.com

RE: 0001-Part-1.-Add-generic-part-for-Intel-CET-enabling

> -Original Message- > From: Tsimbalist, Igor V > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2017 6:04 PM > To: Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: richard.guent...@gmail.com; Tsimbalist, Igor V > <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com> > Subject: RE: 0001-Part-

RE: 0001-Part-1.-Add-generic-part-for-Intel-CET-enabling

Updated patch, version #3. Igor > -Original Message- > From: Tsimbalist, Igor V > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2017 4:32 PM > To: Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: richard.guent...@gmail.com; Tsimbalist, Igor V > <igor.v.tsimbal...@int

RE: 0002-Part-2.-Document-finstrument-control-flow-and-notrack attribute

> -Original Message- > From: Sandra Loosemore [mailto:san...@codesourcery.com] > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2017 6:57 AM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; 'gcc- > patc...@gcc.gnu.org' <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> > Cc: Jeff Law <l...@red

RE: 0001-Part-1.-Add-generic-part-for-Intel-CET-enabling

> -Original Message- > From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com] > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2017 12:44 AM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V <igor.v.tsimbal...@intel.com>; gcc- > patc...@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: richard.guent...@gmail.com > Subject: Re: 0001-Part-1.-Add-generic-

  1   2   >