[cfe-dev] clang and -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=1
Martin Storsjö via cfe-dev
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Dec 3 11:48:00 PST 2019
On Tue, 3 Dec 2019, Serge Guelton via cfe-dev wrote:
> Hi folks (CCing llvm-dev, but that's probably more of a cfe-dev topic),
>
> As a follow-up to that old thread about -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=n
>
> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2015-November/045845.html
>
> And, more recently, to this fedora thread where clang/llvm -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE
> support is claimed to be only partial:
>
> https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2020
>
> I dig into the glibc headers in order to have a better understanding of what's
> going on, and wrote my notes here:
>
> https://sergesanspaille.fedorapeople.org/fortify_source_requirements.rst
>
> TL;DR: clang does provide a similar compile-time checking as gcc, but no runtime
> checking. To assert that I wrote a small test suite:
>
> https://github.com/serge-sans-paille/fortify-test-suite
>
> And indeed, clang doesn't pass it, mostly because it turns call to
> __builtin__(.*)_chk into calls to __builtin__\1.
I remember looking at the fortify macros recently, and iirc the issue was
that the __builtin_object_size builtin, when used in an inline function,
can't evaluate the size of the object in the context where it is inlined,
which the glibc fortify macros/inline functions depend on.
This has been discussed before, e.g. here:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2015-November/045846.html
// Martin
More information about the cfe-dev
mailing list