Summary:
We don't seem to need to assert here, since this function's callers expect
to get a nullptr on error. This way we don't assert on user input.
Bug found with AFL fuzz.
Reviewers: rafael
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9308
llvm-svn: 236027
Summary:
Make sure the abbrev operands are valid and that we can read/skip them
afterwards.
Bug found with AFL fuzz.
Reviewers: rafael
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9030
llvm-svn: 235595
Use an extra bit in the CCInfo to flag the newer version of the
instructiont hat includes the type explicitly.
Tested the newer error cases I added, but didn't add tests for the finer
granularity improvements to existing error paths.
llvm-svn: 235160
Summary:
Without this check the following case failed:
Skip a SubBlock which is not a MODULE_BLOCK_ID nor a BLOCKINFO_BLOCK_ID
Got to end of file
TheModule would still be == nullptr, and we would subsequentially fail
when materializing the Module (assert at the start of
BitcodeReader::MaterializeModule).
Bug found with AFL.
Reviewers: dexonsmith, rafael
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D9014
llvm-svn: 234887
(turns out I had regressed this when sinking handling of this type down
into GetElementPtrInst::Create - since that asserted before the error
handling was performed)
llvm-svn: 232420
While fuzzing LLVM bitcode files, I discovered that (1) the bitcode reader doesn't check that alignments are no larger than 2**29; (2) downstream code doesn't check the range; and (3) for values out of range, corresponding large memory requests (based on alignment size) will fail. This code fixes the bitcode reader to check for valid alignments, fixing this problem.
This CL fixes alignment value on global variables, functions, and instructions: alloca, load, load atomic, store, store atomic.
Patch by Karl Schimpf (kschimpf@google.com).
llvm-svn: 230180
Summary:
When creating {insert,extract}value instructions from a BitcodeReader, we
weren't verifying the fields were valid.
Bugs found with afl-fuzz
Reviewers: rafael
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7325
llvm-svn: 229345
Eventually we can make some of these pass the error along to the caller.
Reports a fatal error if:
We find an invalid abbrev record
We try to get an invalid abbrev number
We can't fill the current word due to an EOF
Fixed an invalid bitcode test to check for output with FileCheck
Bugs found with afl-fuzz
llvm-svn: 226986
Filipe Cabecinhas