[PATCH] D107850: [asan] Implemented intrinsic for the custom calling convention similar used by HWASan for X86.

[Peter Collingbourne via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

pcc added inline comments.


================
Comment at: llvm/include/llvm/IR/Intrinsics.td:1640
 
+def int_asan_check_memaccess :
+  Intrinsic<[],[llvm_ptr_ty, llvm_i8_ty, llvm_i8_ty],
----------------
eugenis wrote:
> vitalybuka wrote:
> > kstoimenov wrote:
> > > vitalybuka wrote:
> > > > vitalybuka wrote:
> > > > > PTAL at lvm.read_register.i32
> > > > > 
> > > > > How about:
> > > > > 
> > > > > llvm.asan.check.memaccess ->
> > > > >   lvm.asan.check_read
> > > > >   lvm.asan.check_write
> > > > >   lvm.asan.kernel.check_read
> > > > >   lvm.asan.kernel.check_write
> > > > > 
> > > > > Even better
> > > > >   lvm.asan.check_read.{i8, i16, i32, ...}
> > > > >   lvm.asan.check_write.{i8, i16, i32, ...}
> > > > >   lvm.asan.kernel.check_read.{i8, i16, i32, ...}
> > > > >   lvm.asan.kernel.check_write.{i8, i16, i32, ...}
> > > > > 
> > > > Looks like underscore is not used in intrinsic names, so essentially the same with dots.
> > > Sounds good to me. I do the full expansion so there will be 20 intrinsics altogether. I will update the code and ping you when done. 
> > @pcc @eugenis 
> > WDYT, I think later we can do the same for HWASAN?
> I don't see what these multiple intrinsics give us that a single memaccess one does not provide?
> 
> As long as access type and similar arguments are immediates.
> 
Agree with @eugenis - these sorts of intrinsic variants are typically used for distinguishing different pointer element types and we're in the process of getting rid of those anyway.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D107850/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D107850