[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [BOLT][BTI] Patch LLD-generated PLTs to contain BTI landing pad (PR #173245)

[Paschalis Mpeis via llvm-branch-commits]

================
@@ -1669,6 +1669,69 @@ class AArch64MCPlusBuilder : public MCPlusBuilder {
     return Base + Offset;
   }
 
+  /// PLT entry before patching:
+  ///
+  ///    adrp x16, Page(&(.got.plt[n]))
+  ///    ldr  x17, [x16, Offset(&(.got.plt[n]))]
+  ///    add  x16, x16, Offset(&(.got.plt[n]))
+  ///    br   x17
+  ///    nop
+  ///    nop
+  ///
+  /// PLT entry after patching:
+  ///
+  ///    bti c
+  ///    adrp x16, Page(&(.got.plt[n]))
+  ///    ldr  x17, [x16, Offset(&(.got.plt[n]))]
+  ///    add  x16, x16, Offset(&(.got.plt[n]))
+  ///    br   x17
+  ///    nop
+  ///
+  /// Safety considerations:
+  ///
+  /// The PLT entry will become incorrect if shifting the ADRP by one
+  /// instruction (4 bytes) moves it across a page boundary.
+  ///
+  /// The PLT entry is 24 bytes, and page size is 4096 (or 16384) bytes.
+  /// Their GCD is 8 bytes, meaning that shifting the ADRP is safe, as long as
+  /// it is shifted by less than 8 bytes.
+  ///
+  /// If the PLT entry does not contain extra nops, this function will create an
+  /// error. This can happen in binaries linked using BFD.
+  void patchPLTEntryForBTI(BinaryFunction &PLTFunction, MCInst &Call) override {
+    BinaryContext &BC = PLTFunction.getBinaryContext();
+    assert(PLTFunction.isPLTFunction() &&
+           "patchPLTEntryForBTI called on a non-PLT function");
+    // Checking if the PLT entry already starts with the BTI needed for Call.
+    auto FirstBBI = PLTFunction.begin();
+    auto FirstII = FirstBBI->begin();
+    assert(FirstII != FirstBBI->end() && "Cannot patch empty PLT entry");
+    if (isCallCoveredByBTI(Call, *FirstII))
+      return;
+    // Checking if there are extra nops at the end. If not, BOLT cannot patch
+    // the PLT entry.
+    auto LastBBI = std::prev(PLTFunction.end());
+    auto LastII = std::prev(LastBBI->end());
+    if (!isNoop(*LastII)) {
+      errs() << "BOLT-ERROR: Cannot patch PLT entry "
+             << PLTFunction.getPrintName()
+             << " to have a BTI landing pad. Relink the workload using LLD.\n";
----------------
paschalis-mpeis wrote:

(optional) as a personal preference I would say binary here.

```suggestion
             << " to have a BTI landing pad. Relink the binary using LLD.\n";
```

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/173245