[PATCH] D38428: Add FileVerifier::isCFIProtected().

[Vlad Tsyrklevich via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

vlad.tsyrklevich added inline comments.


================
Comment at: tools/llvm-cfi-verify/FileAnalysis.h:72
+  // otherwise.
+  bool isCFIProtected(uint64_t Address) const;
+
----------------
hctim wrote:
> vlad.tsyrklevich wrote:
> > `isCFIProtectedIndirectBranch` ?
> Related to https://reviews.llvm.org/D38379#inline-337653.
> 
> Covers indirect calls as well, LMK if you want this change.
How about `isIndirectInstructionCFIProtected()` ?


================
Comment at: tools/llvm-cfi-verify/llvm-cfi-verify.cpp:46
     outs() << "\n";
+    outs() << "  Protected? " << Verifier.isCFIProtected(Address) << "\n";
   }
----------------
hctim wrote:
> vlad.tsyrklevich wrote:
> > Only print this line for indirect branches?
> Related to https://reviews.llvm.org/D38379#inline-337653.
> 
> This currently only prints indirect calls + jumps. Should this be changed?
Ah, I just mis-read the loop condition here.


https://reviews.llvm.org/D38428