[PATCH] D147975: [StackProtector] don't check stack protector before calling nounwind functions

[Eli Friedman via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

efriedma added a comment.

> SJLJ, signal

In practice, most noreturn functions in C are going to be calls to abort()-like functions, not longjmp()-like functions.  And it doesn't really make sense to check the stack canary before we call abort(); the program is going to die before we touch any corrupted memory.

We could consider trying to encode more information into the IR, I guess.  In a lot of cases, we know a "noreturn nounwind" function is abort()-like, and not longjmp()-like; we just don't bother recording it anywhere because nothing cared before this.

> And I think they are more risky somehow, because they can catch up hardware exceptions like dividend by 0, segment fault or illegal instructions. These exceptions are relative eaiser for an attacker to trigger than a normal C++ exception.

Unwinding on divide-by-zero is a Windows-specific thing, as far as I know.  It's possible we want to do something different on Windows?  But there are codesize costs here, and nobody has done any research on the Windows-specific side of this.

> we noticed certain Linux kernel trees stopped booting after this (in functions trying to initialize the stack canary itself).

The kernel should probably disable stack canaries for the functions in question?


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D147975/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D147975