Fix skipping stack protector on arm
This patch fixes the bug in my patch skipping stack protector https://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2010-12/msg00110.html In my skipping stack protector patch, I misunderstood the constant vs. immediate on instruction encodings, and treated immediate as constant by mistake. The instruction 'ldr Rd, [PC, #immed]' loads the address of __stack_chk_guard to Rd, and #immed is an offset from PC. We should get the __stack_chk_guard from *(pc + #immed). As a result of this mistake, arm_analyze_load_stack_chk_guard returns the wrong address of __stack_chk_guard, and the symbol __stack_chk_guard can't be found. However, we continue to match the following instructions when symbol isn't found, so the code still works. In other words, the code just matches the instruction pattern without checking __stack_chk_guard symbol correctly. Joel's patch <https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2014-10/msg00605.html> makes the heuristics stricter that we stop matching instructions if symbol __stack_chk_guard isn't found. Then the bug is exposed. This patch is to correct the load address computation for ldr instruction, and it fixes some fails in gdb.mi/gdb792.exp on armv4t both arm and thumb mode. Regression tested on arm-linux-gnueabi target with {armv4t, armv7-a} x {marm, mthumb} x {-fstack-protector,-fno-stack-protector} gdb: 2014-10-29 Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com> * arm-tdep.c (arm_analyze_load_stack_chk_guard): Compute the loaded address correctly of ldr instruction.
This commit is contained in:
parent
5e1b37e7a3
commit
6ae274b7dc
@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
|
||||
2014-10-29 Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com>
|
||||
|
||||
* arm-tdep.c (arm_analyze_load_stack_chk_guard): Compute the
|
||||
loaded address correctly of ldr instruction.
|
||||
|
||||
2014-10-28 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
|
||||
|
||||
PR gdb/12623
|
||||
|
@ -1204,7 +1204,9 @@ arm_analyze_load_stack_chk_guard(CORE_ADDR pc, struct gdbarch *gdbarch,
|
||||
{
|
||||
*destreg = bits (insn1, 8, 10);
|
||||
*offset = 2;
|
||||
address = bits (insn1, 0, 7);
|
||||
address = (pc & 0xfffffffc) + 4 + (bits (insn1, 0, 7) << 2);
|
||||
address = read_memory_unsigned_integer (address, 4,
|
||||
byte_order_for_code);
|
||||
}
|
||||
else if ((insn1 & 0xfbf0) == 0xf240) /* movw Rd, #const */
|
||||
{
|
||||
@ -1233,9 +1235,12 @@ arm_analyze_load_stack_chk_guard(CORE_ADDR pc, struct gdbarch *gdbarch,
|
||||
unsigned int insn
|
||||
= read_memory_unsigned_integer (pc, 4, byte_order_for_code);
|
||||
|
||||
if ((insn & 0x0e5f0000) == 0x041f0000) /* ldr Rd, #immed */
|
||||
if ((insn & 0x0e5f0000) == 0x041f0000) /* ldr Rd, [PC, #immed] */
|
||||
{
|
||||
address = bits (insn, 0, 11);
|
||||
address = bits (insn, 0, 11) + pc + 8;
|
||||
address = read_memory_unsigned_integer (address, 4,
|
||||
byte_order_for_code);
|
||||
|
||||
*destreg = bits (insn, 12, 15);
|
||||
*offset = 4;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user