Commit Graph

6 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Fangrui Song f554e27224 [AsmPrinter] Omit unique ID for __patchable_function_entries sections
Follow-up for D74006.

When the integrated assembler is used, we use SHF_LINK_ORDER.  The
linked-to symbol is part of ELFSectionKey, thus we can omit the unique
ID.
2020-02-14 20:54:54 -08:00
Fangrui Song 0fbe221543 [MC][ELF] Make linked-to symbol name part of ELFSectionKey
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44775

This rule has been implemented by GNU as https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2020-02/msg00028.html (binutils >= 2.35)

It allows us to simplify

```
.section .foo,"o",foo,unique,0
.section .foo,"o",bar,unique,1  # different section
```

to

```
.section .foo,"o",foo
.section .foo,"o",bar  # different section
```

We consider the two `.foo` different even if the linked-to symbols foo and bar
are defined in the same section.  This is a deliberate choice so that we don't
need to know the section where foo and bar are defined beforehand.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74006
2020-02-14 20:03:04 -08:00
Fangrui Song 22467e2595 Add function attribute "patchable-function-prefix" to support -fpatchable-function-entry=N,M where M>0
Similar to the function attribute `prefix` (prefix data),
"patchable-function-prefix" inserts data (M NOPs) before the function
entry label.

-fpatchable-function-entry=2,1 (1 NOP before entry, 1 NOP after entry)
will look like:

```
  .type	foo,@function
.Ltmp0:               # @foo
  nop
foo:
.Lfunc_begin0:
  # optional `bti c` (AArch64 Branch Target Identification) or
  # `endbr64` (Intel Indirect Branch Tracking)
  nop

  .section  __patchable_function_entries,"awo",@progbits,get,unique,0
  .p2align  3
  .quad .Ltmp0
```

-fpatchable-function-entry=N,0 + -mbranch-protection=bti/-fcf-protection=branch has two reasonable
placements (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2020-01/msg01185.html):

```
(a)         (b)

func:       func:
.Ltmp0:     bti c
  bti c     .Ltmp0:
  nop       nop
```

(a) needs no additional code. If the consensus is to go for (b), we will
need more code in AArch64BranchTargets.cpp / X86IndirectBranchTracking.cpp .

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D73070
2020-01-23 17:02:27 -08:00
Fangrui Song d232c21566 [AsmPrinter] Don't emit __patchable_function_entries entry if "patchable-function-entry"="0"
Add improve tests
2020-01-20 16:13:48 -08:00
Fangrui Song 7fa5290d5b __patchable_function_entries: don't use linkage field 'unique' with -no-integrated-as
.section name, "flags"G, @type, GroupName[, linkage]

As of binutils 2.33, linkage cannot be 'unique'.  For integrated
assembler, we use both 'o' flag and 'unique' linkage to support
--gc-sections and COMDAT with lld.

https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2019-11/msg00266.html
2020-01-12 12:53:44 -08:00
Fangrui Song 4d1e23e3b3 [AArch64] Add function attribute "patchable-function-entry" to add NOPs at function entry
The Linux kernel uses -fpatchable-function-entry to implement DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_REGS
for arm64 and parisc. GCC 8 implemented
-fpatchable-function-entry, which can be seen as a generalized form of
-mnop-mcount. The N,M form (function entry points before the Mth NOP) is
currently only used by parisc.

This patch adds N,0 support to AArch64 codegen. N is represented as the
function attribute "patchable-function-entry". We will use a different
function attribute for M, if we decide to implement it.

The patch reuses the existing patchable-function pass, and
TargetOpcode::PATCHABLE_FUNCTION_ENTER which is currently used by XRay.

When the integrated assembler is used, __patchable_function_entries will
be created for each text section with the SHF_LINK_ORDER flag to prevent
--gc-sections (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93197) and
COMDAT (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93195) issues.

Retrospectively, __patchable_function_entries should use a PC-relative
relocation type to avoid the SHF_WRITE flag and dynamic relocations.

"patchable-function-entry"'s interaction with Branch Target
Identification is still unclear (see
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92424 for GCC discussions).

Reviewed By: peter.smith

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D72215
2020-01-10 09:55:51 -08:00