[PATCH][ARM] Prevent stack guard address from being spilled

Akira Hatanaka ahatanak at gmail.com
Fri Jul 18 16:33:06 PDT 2014


Updated patch which includes the following changes is attached.

- Disabled using LOAD_STACK_GUARD if target is 32-bit x86. 32-bit x86 needs
an extra register to load the stack guard value, which prevents it from
being rematted.
- Added test cases for x86 and thumb1.
- Refactored and simplified functions in ARMBaseInstrInfo which expand the
LOAD_STACK_GUARD pseudo.
- Renamed function parameters and fixed indentations.


On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 10:49 PM, Akira Hatanaka <ahatanak at gmail.com> wrote:

> Updated patch attached.
>
> I made the following changes in addition to fixing the problems Bob
> pointed out:
>
> - In SelectionDAGBuilder::visitIntrinsicCall, replaced the call to
> LoadInst::getAlignment (which was returning 0) with
>  SelectionDAG::getEVTAlignment to get the load instruction's alignment.
> - Changed STATIC to STATIC-NEXT in test case
> CodeGen/ARM/stack_guard_remat.ll.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> > On Jul 11, 2014, at 3:34 PM, Akira Hatanaka <ahatanak at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > The attached patch fixes a bug where the address of the stack guard was
>> being spilled to the stack, which is a potential security vulnerability
>> attackers can take advantage of.
>>
>> I have a few comments inline below….
>>
>> > diff --git a/include/llvm/Target/Target.td
>> b/include/llvm/Target/Target.td
>> > index f77cc7a..26e1242 100644
>> > --- a/include/llvm/Target/Target.td
>> > +++ b/include/llvm/Target/Target.td
>> > @@ -841,6 +841,14 @@ def PATCHPOINT : Instruction {
>> >    let mayLoad = 1;
>> >    let usesCustomInserter = 1;
>> >  }
>> > +def LOAD_STACK_GUARD : Instruction {
>> > +  let OutOperandList = (outs ptr_rc:$dst);
>> > +  let InOperandList = (ins);
>> > +  let mayLoad = 1;
>> > +  bit isReMaterializable = 1;
>> > +  let neverHasSideEffects = 1;
>>
>> neverHasSideEffects is deprecated. This should be "hasSideEffects = 0”.
>>
>> > +  bit isPseudo = 1;
>> > +}
>> >  }
>> >
>> >
>>  //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
>> > diff --git a/include/llvm/Target/TargetLowering.h
>> b/include/llvm/Target/TargetLowering.h
>> > index 180f0f2..ef0fc27 100644
>> > --- a/include/llvm/Target/TargetLowering.h
>> > +++ b/include/llvm/Target/TargetLowering.h
>> > @@ -2589,6 +2589,13 @@ public:
>> >    /// ARM 's' setting instructions.
>> >    virtual void
>> >    AdjustInstrPostInstrSelection(MachineInstr *MI, SDNode *Node) const;
>> > +
>> > +  /// If this function returns true, SelectionDAGBuilder emits a
>> > +  /// LOAD_STACK_GUARD node when it is lowering
>> Intrinsic::stackprotector.
>> > +  virtual bool emitLoadStackGuardNode() const {
>>
>> The name of this function implies that it emits something. It doesn’t. It
>> just returns a bool to say whether the target should use the new
>> LOAD_STACK_GUARD node. The name should reflect that. How about
>> useLoadStackGuardNode?
>>
>> > +    return false;
>> > +  }
>> > +
>>
>> There’s no need to add a blank line here.
>>
>> >  };
>> >
>> >  /// Given an LLVM IR type and return type attributes, compute the
>> return value
>> >
>> > diff --git a/include/llvm/Target/TargetOpcodes.h
>> b/include/llvm/Target/TargetOpcodes.h
>> > index abb3eca..1fbd2ae 100644
>> > --- a/include/llvm/Target/TargetOpcodes.h
>> > +++ b/include/llvm/Target/TargetOpcodes.h
>> > @@ -104,7 +104,13 @@ enum {
>> >    /// support optimizations for dynamic languages (such as javascript)
>> that
>> >    /// rewrite calls to runtimes with more efficient code sequences.
>> >    /// This also implies a stack map.
>> > -  PATCHPOINT = 18
>> > +  PATCHPOINT = 18,
>> > +
>> > +  /// This pseudo-instruction loads the stack guard value. Targets
>> which need
>> > +  /// to prevent the stack guard value or address from being spilled
>> to the
>> > +  /// stack should override TargetLowering::emitLoadStackGuardNode and
>> > +  /// additionally expand this pseudo after register allocation.
>> > +  LOAD_STACK_GUARD = 19
>> >  };
>> >  } // end namespace TargetOpcode
>> >  } // end namespace llvm
>> >
>> > diff --git a/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGBuilder.cpp
>> b/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGBuilder.cpp
>> > index 28d8e98..0d89776 100644
>> > --- a/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGBuilder.cpp
>> > +++ b/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGBuilder.cpp
>> > @@ -1811,9 +1811,19 @@ void
>> SelectionDAGBuilder::visitSPDescriptorParent(StackProtectorDescriptor &SPD,
>> >
>> >    unsigned Align =
>> >      TLI->getDataLayout()->getPrefTypeAlignment(IRGuard->getType());
>> > -  SDValue Guard = DAG.getLoad(PtrTy, getCurSDLoc(), DAG.getEntryNode(),
>> > -                              GuardPtr, MachinePointerInfo(IRGuard, 0),
>> > -                              true, false, false, Align);
>> > +
>> > +  SDValue Guard;
>> > +
>> > +  // If emitLoadStackGuardNode returns true, retrieve the guard value
>> from
>> > +  // the virtual register holding the value. Otherwise, emit a
>> volatile load
>> > +  // to retrieve the stack guard value.
>> > +  if (TLI->emitLoadStackGuardNode())
>> > +    Guard = DAG.getCopyFromReg(DAG.getEntryNode(), getCurSDLoc(),
>> > +                               SPD.getGuardReg(), PtrTy);
>> > +  else
>> > +    Guard = DAG.getLoad(PtrTy, getCurSDLoc(), DAG.getEntryNode(),
>> > +                        GuardPtr, MachinePointerInfo(IRGuard, 0),
>> > +                        true, false, false, Align);
>> >
>> >    SDValue StackSlot = DAG.getLoad(PtrTy, getCurSDLoc(),
>> DAG.getEntryNode(),
>> >                                    StackSlotPtr,
>> > @@ -5220,8 +5230,35 @@ SelectionDAGBuilder::visitIntrinsicCall(const
>> CallInst &I, unsigned Intrinsic) {
>> >      MachineFunction &MF = DAG.getMachineFunction();
>> >      MachineFrameInfo *MFI = MF.getFrameInfo();
>> >      EVT PtrTy = TLI->getPointerTy();
>> > +    SDValue Src, Chain = getRoot();
>>
>> > +
>> > +    if (TLI->emitLoadStackGuardNode()) {
>> > +      // Emit a LOAD_STACK_GUARD node.
>> > +      MachineSDNode *Node =
>> DAG.getMachineNode(TargetOpcode::LOAD_STACK_GUARD,
>> > +                                               sdl, PtrTy, Chain);
>> > +      LoadInst *LI = cast<LoadInst>(I.getArgOperand(0));
>> > +      MachinePointerInfo MPInfo(LI->getPointerOperand());
>> > +      MachineInstr::mmo_iterator MemRefs = MF.allocateMemRefsArray(1);
>> > +      unsigned Flags = MachineMemOperand::MOLoad |
>> > +                       MachineMemOperand::MOInvariant;
>> > +      *MemRefs = MF.getMachineMemOperand(MPInfo, Flags,
>> > +                                         PtrTy.getSizeInBits() / 8,
>> > +                                         LI->getAlignment());
>> > +      Node->setMemRefs(MemRefs, MemRefs + 1);
>> > +
>> > +      // Copy the guard value to a virtual register so that it can be
>> > +      // retrieved in the epilogue.
>> > +      Src = SDValue(Node, 0);
>> > +      const TargetRegisterClass *RC =
>> > +          TLI->getRegClassFor(Src.getSimpleValueType());
>> > +      unsigned Reg = MF.getRegInfo().createVirtualRegister(RC);
>> > +
>> > +      SPDescriptor.setGuardReg(Reg);
>> > +      Chain = DAG.getCopyToReg(Chain, sdl, Reg, Src);
>> > +    } else {
>> > +      Src = getValue(I.getArgOperand(0));   // The guard's value.
>> > +    }
>> >
>> > -    SDValue Src = getValue(I.getArgOperand(0));   // The guard's value.
>> >      AllocaInst *Slot = cast<AllocaInst>(I.getArgOperand(1));
>> >
>> >      int FI = FuncInfo.StaticAllocaMap[Slot];
>> > @@ -5230,7 +5267,7 @@ SelectionDAGBuilder::visitIntrinsicCall(const
>> CallInst &I, unsigned Intrinsic) {
>> >      SDValue FIN = DAG.getFrameIndex(FI, PtrTy);
>> >
>> >      // Store the stack protector onto the stack.
>> > -    Res = DAG.getStore(getRoot(), sdl, Src, FIN,
>> > +    Res = DAG.getStore(Chain, sdl, Src, FIN,
>> >                         MachinePointerInfo::getFixedStack(FI),
>> >                         true, false, 0);
>> >      setValue(&I, Res);
>> > diff --git a/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGBuilder.h
>> b/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGBuilder.h
>> > index 84679f9..cf0846f 100644
>> > --- a/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGBuilder.h
>> > +++ b/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGBuilder.h
>> > @@ -397,7 +397,8 @@ private:
>> >    class StackProtectorDescriptor {
>> >    public:
>> >      StackProtectorDescriptor() : ParentMBB(nullptr),
>> SuccessMBB(nullptr),
>> > -                                 FailureMBB(nullptr), Guard(nullptr) {
>> }
>> > +                                 FailureMBB(nullptr), Guard(nullptr),
>> > +                                 GuardReg(0) { }
>> >      ~StackProtectorDescriptor() { }
>> >
>> >      /// Returns true if all fields of the stack protector descriptor
>> are
>> > @@ -455,6 +456,9 @@ private:
>> >      MachineBasicBlock *getFailureMBB() { return FailureMBB; }
>> >      const Value *getGuard() { return Guard; }
>> >
>> > +    unsigned getGuardReg() const { return GuardReg; }
>> > +    void setGuardReg(unsigned R) { GuardReg = R; }
>> > +
>> >    private:
>> >      /// The basic block for which we are generating the stack
>> protector.
>> >      ///
>> > @@ -477,6 +481,9 @@ private:
>> >      /// stack protector stack slot.
>> >      const Value *Guard;
>> >
>> > +    /// The virtual register holding the stack guard value.
>> > +    unsigned GuardReg;
>> > +
>> >      /// Add a successor machine basic block to ParentMBB. If the
>> successor mbb
>> >      /// has not been created yet (i.e. if SuccMBB = 0), then the
>> machine basic
>> >      /// block will be created.
>> > diff --git a/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64ISelLowering.cpp
>> b/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64ISelLowering.cpp
>> > index 07ff093..97bec0d 100644
>> > --- a/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64ISelLowering.cpp
>> > +++ b/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64ISelLowering.cpp
>> > @@ -7914,6 +7914,10 @@ bool
>> AArch64TargetLowering::shouldExpandAtomicInIR(Instruction *Inst) const {
>> >    return Inst->getType()->getPrimitiveSizeInBits() <= 128;
>> >  }
>> >
>> > +bool AArch64TargetLowering::emitLoadStackGuardNode() const {
>> > +  return Subtarget->isTargetMachO();
>> > +}
>> > +
>> >  TargetLoweringBase::LegalizeTypeAction
>> >  AArch64TargetLowering::getPreferredVectorAction(EVT VT) const {
>> >    MVT SVT = VT.getSimpleVT();
>> > diff --git a/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64ISelLowering.h
>> b/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64ISelLowering.h
>> > index cb0b9ef..7500074 100644
>> > --- a/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64ISelLowering.h
>> > +++ b/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64ISelLowering.h
>> > @@ -324,6 +324,7 @@ public:
>> >
>> >    bool shouldExpandAtomicInIR(Instruction *Inst) const override;
>> >
>> > +  bool emitLoadStackGuardNode() const override;
>> >    TargetLoweringBase::LegalizeTypeAction
>> >    getPreferredVectorAction(EVT VT) const override;
>> > diff --git a/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64InstrInfo.cpp
>> b/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64InstrInfo.cpp
>> > index ce85b2c..bfb32d6 100644
>> > --- a/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64InstrInfo.cpp
>> > +++ b/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64InstrInfo.cpp
>> > @@ -848,6 +848,29 @@ bool AArch64InstrInfo::optimizeCompareInstr(
>> >    return true;
>> >  }
>> >
>> > +bool
>> > +AArch64InstrInfo::expandPostRAPseudo(MachineBasicBlock::iterator MI)
>> const {
>> > +  if (MI->getOpcode() != TargetOpcode::LOAD_STACK_GUARD)
>> > +    return false;
>> > +
>> > +  assert(Subtarget.isTargetMachO() &&
>> > +         "LOAD_STACK_GUARD currently supported only for MachO.”);
>>
>> At least for AArch64, this expansion doesn’t look very specific to MachO.
>> How much harder would it be to make it general? Or are you just being
>> cautious here because you can’t test the other platforms?
>>
>> > +
>> > +  MachineBasicBlock &MBB = *MI->getParent();
>> > +  DebugLoc DL = MI->getDebugLoc();
>> > +  unsigned Reg = MI->getOperand(0).getReg();
>> > +  const GlobalValue *GV =
>> > +      cast<GlobalValue>((*MI->memoperands_begin())->getValue());
>> > +  MachineOperand GA = MachineOperand::CreateGA(GV, 0,
>> AArch64II::MO_GOT);
>>
>> I noticed that you’re using MachineOperand::CreateGA throughout this
>> patch, but almost everywhere else we use MIB’s addGlobalAddress method
>> instead. I don’t see much difference but unless there’s some reason to
>> prefer direct access to CreateGA, it would be better to follow the usual
>> convention.
>>
>> > +  BuildMI(MBB, MI, DL, get(AArch64::LOADgot), Reg).addOperand(GA);
>> > +  BuildMI(MBB, MI, DL, get(AArch64::LDRXui), Reg)
>> > +      .addReg(Reg, RegState::Kill).addImm(0)
>> > +      .addMemOperand(*MI->memoperands_begin());
>> > +  MBB.erase(MI);
>> > +
>> > +  return true;
>> > +}
>> > +
>> >  /// Return true if this is this instruction has a non-zero immediate
>> >  bool AArch64InstrInfo::hasShiftedReg(const MachineInstr *MI) const {
>> >    switch (MI->getOpcode()) {
>> >
>>
>>
>> The rest of this looks fine.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20140718/1cb25745/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: stack_guard3.patch
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 34155 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20140718/1cb25745/attachment.obj>


More information about the llvm-commits mailing list