-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 351
[aarch64][PAC] Move MachO (pro|epi)logue PAC to generic AArch64PointerAuth infra #11713
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: next
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
... which silently caused the wrong overload to be selected.
a1c4480 to
b91363d
Compare
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| // FIXME: do we need to look for the AArch64::RET_POPLESS at the end of the | ||
| // epilogue? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is a question for @ahmedbougacha. I wasn't sure if CC::SwiftCoro == "is RET_POPLESS the last instruction of the epilogue" or if there's a subtle difference there.
b91363d to
a094df4
Compare
| ; CHECK-NEXT: ldp x29, x30, [x29] ; 16-byte Folded Reload | ||
| ; CHECK-NEXT: autib x30, x16 | ||
| ; CHECK-NEXT: ret | ||
| ; CHECK-NEXT: retab |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IIUC this is an improvement, but please double-check me here @ahmedbougacha
…rAuth infra This is _almost_ NFCI, though there are some small changes I expect re: adding cfi's that we were missing before, as well as some small improvements to epilogue sequences in a couple of cases. rdar://163365479
a094df4 to
a2d29c9
Compare
| return MFIa->shouldSignReturnAddress(*a.getMF(), false) == | ||
| MFIb->shouldSignReturnAddress(*b.getMF(), false) && | ||
| MFIa->shouldSignReturnAddress(*a.getMF(), true) == | ||
| MFIb->shouldSignReturnAddress(*b.getMF(), true); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dtellenbach I think you had some question about this bit....?
|
This builds on top of llvm#165056 |
|
@swift-ci test llvm |
This is almost NFCI, though there are some small changes I expect re: adding cfi's that we were missing before, as well as some small improvements to epilogue sequences in a couple of cases.
rdar://163365479