On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 02:34:57PM -0700, h...@zytor.com wrote:
> Wait, what?
>
> You are taking about x86-specific code, and on x86 unaligned memory
> accesses are supported, well-defined, and ubiquitous.
Objtool uses this x86 instruction decoder, people are cross-buildling
objtool to
From: h...@zytor.com
> Sent: 15 October 2020 22:35
> >Don't perform unaligned loads in __get_next and __peek_nbyte_next as
> >these are forms of undefined behavior.
...
> > #define __get_next(t, insn) \
> >-({ t r = *(t*)insn->next_byte; insn->next_byte += sizeof(t); r; })
> >+({ t r;
From: Ian Rogers
> Sent: 15 October 2020 22:47
...
> The decoder is a shared code and using unaligned macros makes life
> hard for the other users of the code. Memcpy is the "standard"
> workaround for this kind of undefined behavior.
>
On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 09:12:16 -0700
Ian Rogers wrote:
> From: Numfor Mbiziwo-Tiapo
>
> Don't perform unaligned loads in __get_next and __peek_nbyte_next as
> these are forms of undefined behavior.
>
> These problems were identified using the undefined behavior sanitizer
> (ubsan) with the
On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 2:35 PM wrote:
>
> On October 15, 2020 9:12:16 AM PDT, Ian Rogers wrote:
> >From: Numfor Mbiziwo-Tiapo
> >
> >Don't perform unaligned loads in __get_next and __peek_nbyte_next as
> >these are forms of undefined behavior.
> >
> >These problems were identified using the
On October 15, 2020 9:12:16 AM PDT, Ian Rogers wrote:
>From: Numfor Mbiziwo-Tiapo
>
>Don't perform unaligned loads in __get_next and __peek_nbyte_next as
>these are forms of undefined behavior.
>
>These problems were identified using the undefined behavior sanitizer
>(ubsan) with the tools
From: Numfor Mbiziwo-Tiapo
Don't perform unaligned loads in __get_next and __peek_nbyte_next as
these are forms of undefined behavior.
These problems were identified using the undefined behavior sanitizer
(ubsan) with the tools version of the code and perf test. Part of this
patch was
7 matches
Mail list logo
