-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.9k
[BOLT] Introduce helpers to match MCInsts one at a time (NFC)
#138883
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
5c688d6
[BOLT] Introduce helpers to match `MCInst`s one at a time (NFC)
atrosinenko c6cc9e1
Improve the description; use MCPlus::getNumPrimeOperands
atrosinenko 75656ec
Polish the description of LowLevelInstMatcherDSL
atrosinenko 99e01ae
Misc trivial fixes for getAuthCheckedReg
atrosinenko File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
While virtually identical, you likely want
isPseudo().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.
My intention was to control the instruction sequence as much as possible in ptrauth-related methods. While CFI pseudos were known to occur in the middle of the sequence (and they don't add any real instructions to the sequence being analyzed), I don't expect any other pseudo instructions to occur here. As I'm not absolutely sure any pseudo instruction must expand into exactly zero bytes of code (this is obviously not the case in the backend in general, but it is probably the case in the disassembled code), I kept
isCFIso far and added a comment. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.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.
I see. Thanks for the context. In BOLT, at the moment CFIs are the only pseudo instructions widely used. I believe we have an assumption that pseudos don't directly produce any code.