[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKwvOdkd480hmHduDHnV2ekoAm_dyPnApU9jc7TARyD072KOGA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 14:12:54 -0700
From: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
To: hpa@...or.com
Cc: Alistair Strachan <astrachan@...gle.com>,
Manoj Gupta <manojgupta@...gle.com>,
Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...gle.com>,
Greg Hackmann <ghackmann@...gle.com>, sedat.dilek@...il.com,
tstellar@...hat.com, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [clang] stack protector and f1f029c7bf
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 1:52 PM Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 1:26 PM Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
> wrote:
> > On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 11:59 AM <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> > > Issue 3: Let's face it, reading and writing the flags should be
> builtins,
> > exactly because it has to do stack operations, which really means the
> > compiler should be involved.
> > I'm happy to propose that as a feature request to llvm+gcc.
> Oh, looks like both clang and gcc have:
> __builtin_ia32_readeflags_u64()
> https://godbolt.org/g/SwPjhq
> Maybe native_save_fl() and native_restore_fl() should be replaced in the
> kernel with
> __builtin_ia32_readeflags_u64() and __builtin_ia32_writeeflags_u64()?
> --
> Thanks,
> ~Nick Desaulniers
Looks like those builtins got added to GCC around the 4.9 timeframe:
https://godbolt.org/g/9VS2E9
Problematically, it seems that GCC does not have __has_builtin to do
feature detection:
https://clang.llvm.org/docs/LanguageExtensions.html#feature-checking-macros
https://godbolt.org/g/oku8ux
--
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers
Powered by blists - more mailing lists