[PATCH] D119296: KCFI sanitizer
Joao Moreira via Phabricator via cfe-commits
cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Thu Jun 2 13:59:38 PDT 2022
joaomoreira added inline comments.
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.h:83
+ KCFI_NT_CALL,
+ KCFI_TC_RETURN,
+
----------------
I did not revise the entire patch yet. With this said, IMHO, this looks like an overcomplication of a simple problem. Is there a reason why you really need specific KCFI_ nodes instead of only embedding the hash information into an attribute at the Machine Instruction? Then, if hash == 0, it just means it is a call that doesn't need instrumentation.
This latter approach will require less code and should be easier to maintain compatible with other CFI approaches. If the reason is because you don't want to have a useless attribute for non-call instructions, then you could possibly have a map where you bind the call instruction with a respective hash.
Unless there is a strong reason for these, I would much better prefer the slim approach suggested. Either way, if there is a reason for this, I would also suggest that you at least don't name these as "KCFI_something", as in the future others might want to reuse the same structure for other CFI approaches.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D119296/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D119296
More information about the cfe-commits
mailing list