Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] stackleak: Update for arm64 | From | Laura Abbott <> | Date | Thu, 22 Feb 2018 11:38:48 -0800 |
| |
On 02/22/2018 08:58 AM, Will Deacon wrote: > Hi Laura, > > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 05:13:02PM -0800, Laura Abbott wrote: >> >> arm64 has another layer of indirection in the RTL. >> Account for this in the plugin. >> >> Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com> >> --- >> scripts/gcc-plugins/stackleak_plugin.c | 5 +++++ >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/scripts/gcc-plugins/stackleak_plugin.c b/scripts/gcc-plugins/stackleak_plugin.c >> index 6fc991c98d8b..7dfaa027423f 100644 >> --- a/scripts/gcc-plugins/stackleak_plugin.c >> +++ b/scripts/gcc-plugins/stackleak_plugin.c >> @@ -244,6 +244,11 @@ static unsigned int stackleak_final_execute(void) >> * that insn. >> */ >> body = PATTERN(insn); >> + /* arm64 is different */ >> + if (GET_CODE(body) == PARALLEL) { >> + body = XEXP(body, 0); >> + body = XEXP(body, 0); >> + } > > Like most kernel developers, I don't know the first thing about GCC internals > so I asked our GCC team and Richard (CC'd) reckons this should be: > > if (GET_CODE(body) == PARALLEL) > body = XVECEXP(body, 0, 0); > > instead of the hunk above. Can you give that a go instead, please? > > Cheers, > > Will >
Yep, seems to work fine and makes sense from my understanding of gcc internals. I'll fix it up for the next version. Thanks for the review!
Laura
| |